Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

WilliamPitt

(58,179 posts)
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 01:26 AM Feb 2014

*ahem*

Fracking in the West has used 97 billion gallons of water since 2011.

97 billion gallons of water.

---

“Hydraulic fracturing is increasing competitive pressures for water in some of the country’s most water-stressed and drought-ridden regions,” said Mindy Lubber, president of the Ceres green investors’ network.

Without new tougher regulations on water use, she warned industry could be on a “collision course” with other water users.

“It’s a wake-up call,” said Prof James Famiglietti, a hydrologist at the University of California, Irvine. “We understand as a country that we need more energy but it is time to have a conversation about what impacts there are, and do our best to try to minimise any damage.”

It can take millions of gallons of fresh water to frack a single well, and much of the drilling is tightly concentrated in areas where water is in chronically short supply, or where there have been multi-year droughts.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/05/report-fracking-is-depleting-water-in-americas-driest-areas/

It's data. Use it or abuse it, but there it is.

74 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
*ahem* (Original Post) WilliamPitt Feb 2014 OP
K & R !!! WillyT Feb 2014 #1
But we buy water in bottles from corporations. Rex Feb 2014 #2
but but but... progressoid Feb 2014 #3
Gee, Will . . . Jack Rabbit Feb 2014 #4
The best, professional grade jsr Feb 2014 #16
Forget reality and facts, why do you hate Obama?!!1! n/t Skip Intro Feb 2014 #5
+1 L0oniX Feb 2014 #46
One of thousands of reasons why no tax on the 1% is high enough. merrily Feb 2014 #6
Bologna! you mean those saying theres no connection between the two 1awake Feb 2014 #7
Then you'd better STOP them yourself. DeSwiss Feb 2014 #8
FABUOUS!!!!! I wondered how Maine ultimately beat Nestle into leaving!!!!! magical thyme Feb 2014 #25
De nada. DeSwiss Feb 2014 #45
Don't. fleabiscuit Feb 2014 #9
The water is so important, I'm happy you addressed it. Cleita Feb 2014 #10
recommend frwrfpos Feb 2014 #11
Well, this is what it boils down to, IMHO: ReRe Feb 2014 #12
From today's TOON Roundup 4... Electric Monk Feb 2014 #13
I want to know. . . ReasonableToo Feb 2014 #14
I find it incredibly disappointing that Governor Brown Cheese4TheRat Feb 2014 #15
Link to reliable news source? xfundy Feb 2014 #17
Per your request: Cheese4TheRat Feb 2014 #22
I love one of the comments to your fracking article. SunSeeker Feb 2014 #23
See My Post #20. LA is on the way to banning fracking in Los Angeles. Hooray! JDPriestly Feb 2014 #21
Los Angeles comes through! Cheese4TheRat Feb 2014 #33
More! proverbialwisdom Feb 2014 #48
Absolutely fantastic! I hope other counties follow LA's lead. Cheese4TheRat Mar 2014 #64
Do you think he should have vetoed so there would be no rules? antiquie Feb 2014 #28
I think he should impose a moratorium. Don't you? Cheese4TheRat Feb 2014 #35
No. antiquie Feb 2014 #36
The Governor is elected by the entire state. Cheese4TheRat Feb 2014 #37
Not in my universe. ~ nt antiquie Feb 2014 #38
Do you live in a state where the Governor is not elected by the people of the state? Cheese4TheRat Feb 2014 #42
Hell I'll kick this even though I may regret it later in another thread. Agschmid Feb 2014 #18
Who cares? We have more billionaires than any other nation! Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #19
But, Los Angeles is leading the way toward banning fracking. JDPriestly Feb 2014 #20
"leading the way toward banning fracking." ProSense Feb 2014 #27
This won't be solved overnight. Obama has ramped up solar. That can be seen JDPriestly Feb 2014 #32
Kick. Scuba Feb 2014 #24
Invest in water...thats what our investment counselor said. Historic NY Feb 2014 #26
hmmm In_The_Wind Feb 2014 #31
The One Percent already are.... woo me with science Mar 2014 #67
I guess it proves his point... Historic NY Mar 2014 #68
Absolutely. woo me with science Mar 2014 #70
***Gasp***. You want people to look at facts? Silly you. nt antigop Feb 2014 #29
This one I can k&r. uppityperson Feb 2014 #30
Yes but we've learned here that you are now persona non grata. Warren Stupidity Feb 2014 #34
By "banned list" you mean the "subject to criticism list" ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2014 #49
Staggering...I didn't think anything could shock me anymore KauaiK Feb 2014 #39
K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast Feb 2014 #40
Actually, that time was 40 years ago. redqueen Feb 2014 #41
Shhhh iamthebandfanman Feb 2014 #43
and meanwhile: Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #44
It gets worse. proverbialwisdom Feb 2014 #47
It's not like we need water for more important uses, like drinking, growing food, or putting out tclambert Feb 2014 #50
97 billion gallons of water that is forever removed from the cycle Champion Jack Feb 2014 #51
Oh, don't worry about it. Curmudgeoness Feb 2014 #52
coming back to when I am not tired. This is astounding rurallib Feb 2014 #53
97 billion gallons of water is 7/10ths of 1% of the annual water consumption in CA. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #54
Except that, in normal use it returns to the cycle Champion Jack Feb 2014 #56
With such a small amount, it doesn't matter. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #57
the "small amounts" impact--but keep trying niyad Mar 2014 #74
link please niyad Feb 2014 #58
97 billion gallons of water is 293,000 acre feet of water. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #60
Being poisoned. grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #61
That's not a complete thought. I don't know what you're trying to say. Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #62
so it's okay with you to permanently destroy our water, even in the supposedly small amounts niyad Feb 2014 #63
It's not a "supposedly" small amount. It is a small amount by any relevant measure. Gravitycollapse Mar 2014 #66
Stop trying. ProSense Mar 2014 #71
so you have no problem with the fact that the supposedly (since the figures come from industry, niyad Mar 2014 #73
several weeks ago in the sunday denver post, there was an "article" (which read more like an niyad Feb 2014 #55
Fracking, being an environmental disaster, makes no freakin' sense: neither does TPP or indepat Feb 2014 #59
In 2012, people said we aould get to see the REAL OBama in his 2nd term. bvar22 Mar 2014 #65
Trading Water For Fuel is Fracking Crazy handmade34 Mar 2014 #69
My understanding is that FRESH water is not Ilsa Mar 2014 #72
 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
2. But we buy water in bottles from corporations.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 01:30 AM
Feb 2014

Uncle Sam guards our meta data day and night. Won't you think of his freedumbs?

1awake

(1,494 posts)
7. Bologna! you mean those saying theres no connection between the two
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 01:54 AM
Feb 2014

were fibbing?!?!?! Hard to believe!


 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
8. Then you'd better STOP them yourself.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 01:54 AM
Feb 2014
- Because if you're waiting for your ''elected'' officials to do the right thing, then you'd be well-advised to go ahead and invest in that burial policy you've been thinking about getting, since they're all bought and paid for, for the most part. Or, they're idiots. Which ain't happenstance.

Wake up people. Time is of the essence.

K&R





 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
25. FABUOUS!!!!! I wondered how Maine ultimately beat Nestle into leaving!!!!!
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 08:21 AM
Feb 2014

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!

Where did this come from? Link?

Never mind...found the organizations through the individual

http://www.celdf.org/

http://paulcienfuegos.com/

 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
45. De nada.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 07:15 PM
Feb 2014

The thing that impressed me about Paul Cienfuegos' comments was the idea that we tend to 'react' rather than to state what it is we want up front. Which is indicative of sheeple who've allowed their governing responsibilities to be usurped and squashed by corporate interests.

We've always had the ability to fight them, but we forgot how to talk to other people, to relate to other people. Our technologies have simultaneously brought the world together and yet kept us separate at the same time. We can communicate online but have problems talking to each other face-to-face.

- But we're just out of practice......

fleabiscuit

(4,542 posts)
9. Don't.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 01:58 AM
Feb 2014

Don’t try to suggest that non-renewable energy costs are hidden and unfairly compared to renewable energy. Somebodies shorts will creep into their crack.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
10. The water is so important, I'm happy you addressed it.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 01:59 AM
Feb 2014

The morons in my state are beginning to realize it. What it will do to trigger earthquakes in our state is horrendous. As a journalist you might want to interview geologists that I believe are still not bought out by the oil companies in our major universities as well as others.

ReasonableToo

(505 posts)
14. I want to know. . .
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 02:15 AM
Feb 2014

How much does it cost in water, energy and other resources to get a gallon out of the ground, transported to a refinery and turned into usable gas/oil? And then how much does that gallon sell for?

And of course, we taxpayers are subsidizing the extraction process.

Further, if the fracking companies had to somehow fix the scarred land and clean the waterways before they move on, how that would factor in to the bottom line?

This CAN'T be a profitable enterprise!

 

Cheese4TheRat

(107 posts)
15. I find it incredibly disappointing that Governor Brown
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 02:18 AM
Feb 2014

would declare a state of emergency because of the worst drought on record, and simultaneously support fracking.

When did Governor Moonbeam become Governor Lowbeam?

SunSeeker

(51,794 posts)
23. I love one of the comments to your fracking article.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 04:07 AM
Feb 2014

There was a time when we consumed oil as if there were an endless supply. Now that we’ve accepted that the cheap sources of oil are gone, we are instead consuming fresh water as if there were an endless supply. I believe we need to stop calling ourselves an intelligent species.



California needs to ban all fracking. California does not need more earthquakes, nor loss of water.

proverbialwisdom

(4,959 posts)
48. More!
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 08:13 PM
Feb 2014
4h
So after months of hustle, the LA fracking moratorium passed & will now be drafted as a zoning ordinance. Then another vote #banfrackingLA


5h
It passes!!!!! OMG pic.twitter.com/FMCCTQDYnZ

[img][/img]
 

Cheese4TheRat

(107 posts)
64. Absolutely fantastic! I hope other counties follow LA's lead.
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 12:02 AM
Mar 2014

I need to find out where other fracking is occurring in California and see what is happening.

Thanks for the informational responses!

 

antiquie

(4,299 posts)
28. Do you think he should have vetoed so there would be no rules?
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 09:59 AM
Feb 2014
California Fracking Bill Signed Into Law By Governor Jerry Brown

The California law would require oil companies to obtain permits for fracking as well as acidizing, the use of hydrofluoric acid and other chemicals to dissolve shale rock.

It would also require notification of neighbors, public disclosure of the chemicals used, as well as groundwater and air quality monitoring and an independent scientific study.

The law "could create conditions that will make it difficult to continue to provide a reliable supply of domestic petroleum energy for California," said Catherine Reheis-Boyd, president of the Western State Petroleum Association, which represents oil companies in California.
 

antiquie

(4,299 posts)
36. No.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 02:03 PM
Feb 2014

While I wished the Legislature had passed a moratorium, I don't believe the governor should overrule the Democratic majority in both houses.

 

Cheese4TheRat

(107 posts)
42. Do you live in a state where the Governor is not elected by the people of the state?
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 06:57 PM
Feb 2014

Or do you believe the Governor should not use the tools available as the executive?

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
19. Who cares? We have more billionaires than any other nation!
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 03:30 AM
Feb 2014

When life is reduced to an abstract contest between two teams playing in the same league, what difference is there between immediate want and future necessity?

We're determined to go down and to take as much of the planet with us as we can grasp.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
20. But, Los Angeles is leading the way toward banning fracking.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 03:45 AM
Feb 2014

A Los Angeles City Council committee took a first step Tuesday toward banning hydraulic fracturing and other disputed practices tied to oil extraction, winning cheers and applause from a packed auditorium.

"Fracking and other unconventional drilling is happening here in Los Angeles, and without the oversight and review to keep our neighborhoods safe," Councilman Mike Bonin told the Planning and Land Use Management Committee.

. . . .

The council is slated to vote Friday to draft new rules that would prohibit hydraulic fracturing and other forms of “well stimulation” in Los Angeles until the council is sure they are safe. City planners were unable to say Tuesday how many drilling sites in Los Angeles might be affected.

Hydraulic fracturing, often referred to as fracking, is a practice of injecting water mixed with chemicals to fracture underground rock, releasing pockets of oil or natural gas.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-los-angeles-fracking-ban-20140225,0,3908061.story?track=rss

Let's hope that LA is setting a new trend.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
27. "leading the way toward banning fracking."
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 09:51 AM
Feb 2014

Other states are moving to curb the effects of fracking.

Colorado Becomes The First State To Regulate Methane Emissions From Fracking
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/24/3322651/colorado-methane-fracking/

One can be against fracking and still have to face the realities of the day. The Obama administration has ramped up solar (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024547836) and other clean energy sources. Environmentalists hate the all-of-the-above approach, and rightfully so. Still, there is going to be a transition.

The administation is in a position to try to regulate a problem controlled by states with laws that vary widely from Texas (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024569123#post26) to Vermont, which banned fracking. Still, there is the reality.

The business of a natural gas pipeline in Vermont
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20130908/NEWS01/309080017/Rutland-or-bust

Vermont pipeline expansion reignites fracking debate
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/the-stream/the-stream-officialblog/2013/10/4/vermont-pipelineexpansionreignitesfrackingdebate.html

Propane production up, but U.S. shortage looms

Shale gas producers across the country are pulling so much propane out of natural gas wells, they have quadrupled exports in the last three years. By the end of 2014, Sunoco Logistics Partners will have the capacity to load a million gallons a day of Marcellus Shale propane onto ships at its Marcus Hook terminal south of Philadelphia.

But this winter's weird weather, and a bumper crop of Midwestern corn that required four times more propane for drying, has triggered an unprecedented domestic shortage of the fuel, a byproduct of natural gas production and crude oil refining.

<...>

Elected officials in propane-dependent states are demanding relief. On Feb. 14, the congressional delegation from Vermont, where 15 percent of households heat with propane, called on the U.S. Commerce Department to impose a temporary export ban.

"The problem is that almost all new propane production over the past three years has been exported to more lucrative overseas markets instead of being used to meet consumer demand right here in the United States," said the letter from Sens. Bernie Sanders and Patrick Leahy and Rep. Peter Welch.

- more -

http://articles.philly.com/2014-02-24/business/47607065_1_much-propane-national-propane-gas-association-marcellus-shale

Emergency Proposal on Propane Prices
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/recent-business/emergency-proposal-on-propane-prices

Why hasn't the Boxer-Sanders climate bill gotten more attention?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024509463

Candidates for the Hall of Fame.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
32. This won't be solved overnight. Obama has ramped up solar. That can be seen
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 12:50 PM
Feb 2014

on the border between California and Nevada.

We still have a lot more to do.

Los Angeles sits on earthquake faults. The frackers deny it, but the record in Oklahoma and elsewhere suggests too strongly to justify the risk that fracking is associated with earthquakes and may set them off. We just can't risk that here in LA.

The Boxer-Sanders bill would also be a big step forward. Thanks for posting the information on this. It's a shame (the word does not begin to express how terrible it is) that Obama does not have a more responsive Congress at this crucial time for the future of our planet.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
67. The One Percent already are....
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 12:08 AM
Mar 2014

and that is terrifying.

Water rights *are* being bought up all over the world by major corporations right now. History shows that the price of water rises exponentially once major corporations are involved.

One and one make two. We face a grave problem in years to come, if we do not get our act together and fight back against this tide of rising corporate domination. We think price gouging and speculation on gasoline are bad....Wait 'til they have control of the world's drinkable water.

Corporations have no conscience, simply by virtue of what they are. They have no morality, no ethics, no loyalty to anything except the bottom line. They exist to profit, and lives and suffering don't figure into the spreadsheets. That is why it is so dangerous to cede our government, our lives, and the lives of our children, to them. They are coming for the world's fresh drinking water. They are coming for our children's education. They are coming for everything.

They intend to corral us to make a profit from every move we make, every need we have, every single aspect of our lives, from the moment we are born to the moment we die. We are not human beings to these corporate ghouls. We are human resources for them to squeeze dry of every cent and discard.


Water as Basic Human Right Has a Market Price, Says U.N. Chief
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=56736

In Guayaquil, Ecuador, water prices increased by 180 percent after the water system was taken over by Interagua, a subsidiary of Bechtel.




Historic NY

(37,458 posts)
68. I guess it proves his point...
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 12:58 AM
Mar 2014

water is worth more than gold. Anything related to water or water conservation or preservation will be valuable.

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
34. Yes but we've learned here that you are now persona non grata.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 01:23 PM
Feb 2014

Seems like you are some sort of rightwing troll for daring to criticize the president.

A shame. Otherwise you might have made a good point. Now you are on the banned list.

ConservativeDemocrat

(2,720 posts)
49. By "banned list" you mean the "subject to criticism list"
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 08:59 PM
Feb 2014

..."for deliberately misrepresenting President Obama's positions and actions".

And yes. Yes he is.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

KauaiK

(544 posts)
39. Staggering...I didn't think anything could shock me anymore
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 06:06 PM
Feb 2014

I was born in CA and remember films in school in the 1950's about conserving water. HAH!! What good is oil if people can't grow food to eat??

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
40. K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations!
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 06:49 PM
Feb 2014

And all this water wasted is done in the interest of making a very few already filthy rich more wealthy.

redqueen

(115,108 posts)
41. Actually, that time was 40 years ago.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 06:52 PM
Feb 2014
“We understand as a country that we need more energy but it is time to have a conversation about what impacts there are, and do our best to try to minimise any damage.”


But too many were stupid and selfish and greedy and would not listen.

Better late than never? Only time will tell.

iamthebandfanman

(8,127 posts)
43. Shhhh
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 06:58 PM
Feb 2014

hadn't you heard?
the democratic party LOVES fracking..

why else would fracking companies have hired so many ex democratic politician ?
every time i see Ed Rendell on a 'news network' hyping up ANYTHING (let alone fracking).. i literally throw up a lil in my mouth. hate these sellout freaks.

proverbialwisdom

(4,959 posts)
47. It gets worse.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 08:09 PM
Feb 2014
http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/petroleum/fracking-waste-is-being-dumped-into-the-ocean-off-californias-coast.html

Fracking Waste is Being Dumped Into the Ocean Off California's Coast

by Chris Clarke
on February 26, 2014 2:08 PM


ReWire has reported previously on a form of oil well enhancement in California that doesn't get much attention from the press, namely, offshore fracking. At least 12 rigs off the coast of California inject proprietary mixes of potentially dangerous chemicals into undersea rock formations at high pressure. They do this in order to break those rocks up which makes it easier to pump out the crude.

That's the process commonly known as fracking, short for hydraulic fracturing. The fluid pumped into the wells usually gets pumped back out again as wastewater. And if you suddenly have an uneasy feeling about where those offshore rigs dispose of that wastewater, you may well be correct. About half of the state's offshore rigs pump at least some of their wastewater right into the Santa Barbara Channel.

According to the Center for Biological Diversity, oil rig operators have federal permits to dump more than nine billion gallons of fracking wastewater into California's ocean waters each year. That's enough wastewater to fill more than 100 stadiums the size of the Rose Bowl brim-full of toxic waste. And CBD wants the Environmental Protection Agency to do something about it.

<>

Link from TWITTER.

tclambert

(11,087 posts)
50. It's not like we need water for more important uses, like drinking, growing food, or putting out
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 09:55 PM
Feb 2014

forest fires. Hmm, if they fill up one of those fire fighting helicopter water buckets at a fracking retention pond, will it make the fire burn hotter?

Champion Jack

(5,378 posts)
51. 97 billion gallons of water that is forever removed from the cycle
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 10:03 PM
Feb 2014

Poisoned, gone they don't recycle it, they inject it into the ground at high pressure which some say is causing earthquakes.
We have substitutes for gas see how long you can go without fresh water

Curmudgeoness

(18,219 posts)
52. Oh, don't worry about it.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 10:27 PM
Feb 2014

I am sure that we will learn how to economically desalinate water soon. And since the ocean levels will be rising due to climate change, it is a win-win. We can drink the oceans and keep them from flooding the coastal areas. See, we have solutions.

Actually, what you bring up is something that bothers me more than anything else about fracking (and I am bothered by all of it). Fresh water taken out of the water cycle forever seems to be a no-brainer problem.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
54. 97 billion gallons of water is 7/10ths of 1% of the annual water consumption in CA.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 10:37 PM
Feb 2014

Consider that this is a total amount over multiple years and is distributed across the United States, and it becomes obvious that this figure is irrelevant.

Fracking is terrible. But the water consumption figure quoted isn't exactly an overwhelming statistic.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
57. With such a small amount, it doesn't matter.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 10:55 PM
Feb 2014

97 billion gallons of water is minuscule. It sounds like a lot because we are used to thinking about personal or group consumption. But relative to consumption of the population of a country or even a state, it is inconsequential.

niyad

(113,816 posts)
74. the "small amounts" impact--but keep trying
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 11:21 AM
Mar 2014

(I live in one of the drought-plagued areas, a desert that is chronically short of water--but, hey, I guess I shouldn't be concerned, because, after all, it's such a miniscule amount, in an area of miniscule amounts.)

Local aquifer levels in the Eagle Ford formation have dropped by up to 300ft over the last few years.

A number of small communities in Texas oil and gas country have already run out of water or are in danger of running out of water in days, pushed to the brink by a combination of drought and high demand for water for fracking.

Twenty-nine communities across Texas could run out of water in 90 days, according to the Texas commission on environmental quality. Many reservoirs in west Texas are at only 25% capacity.

Nearly all of the wells in Colorado (97%) were located in areas where most of the ground and surface water is already stretched between farming and cities, the report said. It said water demand for fracking in the state was expected to double to 6bn gallons by 2015 – or about twice as much as the entire city of Boulder uses in a year.

In California, where a drought emergency was declared last month, 96% of new oil and gas wells were located in areas where there was already fierce competition for water.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
60. 97 billion gallons of water is 293,000 acre feet of water.
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 11:11 PM
Feb 2014

Annual net consumption of California is 64 million acre feet.

http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_211EHChapter2R.pdf

So my number crunching was actually wrong. The real figure is 4/10ths of 1%, not 7/10ths. Which makes it even smaller.

niyad

(113,816 posts)
63. so it's okay with you to permanently destroy our water, even in the supposedly small amounts
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 11:53 PM
Feb 2014

being used? it's okay to use that water in states that are in drought, or are actually deserts? really?

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
66. It's not a "supposedly" small amount. It is a small amount by any relevant measure.
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 12:06 AM
Mar 2014

97 billion is a large figure but it means nothing without context.

There are plenty of reasons to despise fracking. The total volume of water used to drill? Not one of them.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
71. Stop trying.
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 08:49 AM
Mar 2014

"There are plenty of reasons to despise fracking. The total volume of water used to drill? Not one of them. "

Exactly. It's like you said:

"It sounds like a lot because we are used to thinking about personal or group consumption. But relative to consumption of the population of a country or even a state, it is inconsequential. "

Beyond that, this OP is in response to a claim that was challenged by someone. The person made the point in a rude way, but it was still valid: fracking doesn't cause droughts.

Here is the point in the other piece that was challenged:

"the drought-causing national practice of fracking"

Here is the point in this OP:

“Hydraulic fracturing is increasing competitive pressures for water in some of the country’s most water-stressed and drought-ridden regions,” said Mindy Lubber, president of the Ceres green investors’ network."

That's correct, and does not support the claim that fracking is "drought-causing."

Fracking is a practice of injecting water into the ground. The amount of water usage is of concern when the "competitive pressures for water' increase. Given the amount of consumption you cited, this would be a grave concern in a prolonged drought, when water shortages become severe.

A drought is a climate phenomenon that has nothing to do with water consumption.

The orginal claim was challenged, but no one wants to hear the facts...because.

niyad

(113,816 posts)
73. so you have no problem with the fact that the supposedly (since the figures come from industry,
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 10:59 AM
Mar 2014

do we even trust them???) small amounts of water are being destroyed in drought-plagued states?



Local aquifer levels in the Eagle Ford formation have dropped by up to 300ft over the last few years.

A number of small communities in Texas oil and gas country have already run out of water or are in danger of running out of water in days, pushed to the brink by a combination of drought and high demand for water for fracking.

Twenty-nine communities across Texas could run out of water in 90 days, according to the Texas commission on environmental quality. Many reservoirs in west Texas are at only 25% capacity.

Nearly all of the wells in Colorado (97%) were located in areas where most of the ground and surface water is already stretched between farming and cities, the report said. It said water demand for fracking in the state was expected to double to 6bn gallons by 2015 – or about twice as much as the entire city of Boulder uses in a year.

In California, where a drought emergency was declared last month, 96% of new oil and gas wells were located in areas where there was already fierce competition for water.

niyad

(113,816 posts)
55. several weeks ago in the sunday denver post, there was an "article" (which read more like an
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 10:48 PM
Feb 2014

industry ad, and probably was) that said fracking really used only the most miniscule amount of water, and that there is now a technique that cleans the water back to drinking quality. cannot locate it online, but it was awful.

indepat

(20,899 posts)
59. Fracking, being an environmental disaster, makes no freakin' sense: neither does TPP or
Fri Feb 28, 2014, 11:01 PM
Feb 2014

Keystone. So now a triple whammy on the American people is well in the making

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
65. In 2012, people said we aould get to see the REAL OBama in his 2nd term.
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 12:05 AM
Mar 2014

I don't think THIS is what they meant.

...or maybe they did.

Ilsa

(61,710 posts)
72. My understanding is that FRESH water is not
Sat Mar 1, 2014, 08:59 AM
Mar 2014

required for fracking. Drillers want fresh to preserve their equipment longer. Fresh vs dirty or gray is a matter of money to them.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»*ahem*