Scientific Evidence Regarding Fracking
- Print print this page
- Discuss 11 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
Regarding the article “Effects of Fracking Laid Out” (Nov. 13), my wife’s family owns property in North Dakota, in the Bakkan formation. We have personal experience with oil and gas regulations.
Regarding the statement on that there is little scientific evidence concerning fracking, the North Dakota Industrial Commission Department of Mineral Resources, Oil and Gas Division, has worked since 1981, when regulations were first published, to control “perforating, fracturing, and chemically treating wells.” The section of regulations has been revised twice since, in January 1983, and the latest, April 1, 2010.
North Dakota has done a good job balancing between property owners and oil companies. At www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/rules/rulebook.pdf you will find a 150-page manual. Chapter one discusses regulations to protect surface and ground water.
Chapter two lists detailed regulations covering “Casing, Tubing and Cementing Requirements.” There are actually four separate pipes used in a drilling, the outer pipe being 9 5/8 inches and the second pipe 7 1/2 inches. Cement is forced down between these pipes to form a barrier to any leakage. These pipes go down two miles. Two other pipes are then inserted horizontally, a 4 1/2 inch and a 2 7/8 inch. The fracking is done by the smallest pipe.
This section has been revised 10 times starting April 30, 1981, with the latest effective April 1, 2010.
The North Dakota assembly states, “The legislative assembly designates hydraulic fracturing, a mechanical method of increasing the permeability of rock to increase the amount of oil and gas produced from the rock, an acceptable recovery process in this state.”
As to the question of North Carolina having no model state to turn to for guidance, North Dakota would be my recommendation for its extensive experience and oversight of the oil and gas industry.
Tom Oleson
Pinehurst
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
Sully 1 year, 6 months ago
This letter appears to be about scientific evidence, but it points to regulations and not evidence.
GJohn 1 year, 6 months ago
Right. Regulations are great if they are followed. Look to the Pennsylvania farmers for real evidence.
SH59 1 year, 6 months ago
This is not Dakota and there's so much more than drilling to consider here in Moore County. Hundreds of trucks entering our fragile road system, the noise from the pumps that will never stop, the permanent altering of our landscape, the infusion of hundreds of transient workers, potential pollution of water wells.....Is this what you wanted for your retirement?
drefleury 1 year, 6 months ago
A reminder that our reserves are located much closer to the surface (within a mile in most places), thus the potential for groundwater contamination from any fissure in the tubing is compounded. We should demand that any elected official who accepted money from any energy company or property owner advocate of fracking recuse themselves from deliberation on this issue. The conflict of interest is too apparent. This should also include elected officials with stock in energy companies or companies that stand to benefit from this proposal. That should be done immediately, and any "studies" to take place after we've whittled the field of legislators down to those who might remain impartial. This suggestion will receive a cool reception from those in power, but is what we should strive to expect from our elected representatives.
ProudYankee 1 year, 6 months ago
The modern republican party does not believe in science, they only worship money. I'm sure our republican led legislature has already been bought and paid for on this issue, and we are doomed to learn the lessons of fracking the hard way.
skylinefirepest 1 year, 6 months ago
ProudYankee, take your attitude and go back where you came from. Most Conservatives are just like me...aware of the environment and also aware of the need to reduce our dependance on petroleum or gas from foreign sources that don't like us. Just a few years ago natural gas was the darling of the Left but now the greenies have taken over and just lately put a hold on the pipeline without any evidence to show that there would be anything but benefit from it!! And Obama conveniently stalled it until after the election.
JER 1 year, 6 months ago
Excellent, skylinefirepest is "aware of the environment". What, exactly, does that mean? Are you a speech writer for Herman Cain?
Roorke 1 year, 6 months ago
This is not a Republican verses Democrat issue, as both sides take huge amounts of money from companies involved in fracking for natural gas. It will not matter who is in power if your drinking water is destroyed. An interesting fact is that even though North Dakota has over 20,000 more square miles of land than North Carolina, North Carolina has almost eight million more people in population using 2010 information.
skylinefirepest 1 year, 6 months ago
JER--It means that I have to live here and use the water, air, and earth just like anyone else and I don't want my homeland polluted or made unusable! That should be easy to understand for all that read it. Now that I have said how I stand I'll add that sometimes un-needed regulation forces us to buy goods and products that we have to have from countries that don't particularly like us and don't have our best interests at heart. I think that it is a security issue to have a good supply of oil produced in our own country so that our military and our country don't come to a screaming halt if some petty dictator decides that his own oil producing country is not going to sell to us. We have not had a Democrat leader who feels that way in some time. We also have not had a leader in some time that feels that our borders should be secure and as a result we have persons from "countries of interest" ( read that to mean terrorists ) that have entered our country probably with the intent of doing mischief. And we now have no idea where they are located. It really would be nice if we had a leader who would put our security in the forefront.
drefleury 1 year, 6 months ago
OK, this is getting off topic. Clearly the folks responding to this thread are intersted in our environment. It doesn't matter if anyone is a R or D, the environment we live in doesn't care. If you're writing on this thread, you clearly see some issues with letting companies come in and pillage the land by fracking, and if so, should support getting the word out about any politicians who are cozy with the companies who stand to benefit. They should be forced to recuse themselves by the will of the people, because their judgment is tained. It's that simple. So let's find out who is behind this nonsense, and work together to expose the corruption. If none exists, we'll all be better for the exercise, but it's already been shown that many of our elected officials take money from energy companies.
SH59 1 year, 6 months ago
Skyline, the gas that's being pumped from American soil doesn't stay here. It's sold to the highest bidder world wide. That's what people don't realize, it's not "our" gas and oil, it belongs to the companies who drill for it.
GJohn 1 year, 6 months ago
GJohn 1 year, 6 months ago
Our only choices are not foreign energy or domestic energy. There are other options, including solar energy and recycled cooking oil! Don't be blinded by the "if we don't use fracking, we're tied to foreign oil forever" argument. It isn't true.
Fracking uses a chemical cocktail that would scare you to death; that is, the chemicals that have been discovered to be used - the fracking companies refuse to disclose the truth. Doesn't that raise a red flag by itself?
JER 1 year, 6 months ago
The vast majority of oil being imported into this country does not come from countries with "petty dictators" who want to do us harm or that could bring our country to a "screaming halt" (I think skylinefirepest meant screeching halt but one can never be certain). The top two countries we import from are both North American countries (Canada and Mexico). Having said that, I think 99% of our efforts should be directed at finding feasible alternatives to burning fossil fuel (the other 1% can be spent maintaining an oil, gas and coal supply until we don't need one anymore). I think it should be our number one priority because it would solve many of our other problems as well, starting with jobs and ending with the knowledge that we would not have to wage wars to keep our SUVs running. Kind of ironic that in order to use any of the latest hi tech devices, we had to set something on fire to make it work. Time to boldly move out of the 19th century.