Saturday, December 10, 2011

EPA proves fracking DOES contaminate water supply: SFC was right again

Report shows SFC was right, local businessman Jacobs-WRONG!

At the Safe Fracking Coalition's first town hall event last June, Laredo businessman Gary Jacobs scolded the SFC and it's invited panelists for supposedly spreading rumors about fracking's dangers. Jacobs insisted that fracking was absolutely safe and scoffed at the idea that the toxic chemicals used in the process could seep upward and contaminate South Texan's precious water supply. 

 Well, it certainly appears that Jacobs was 100 per cent wrong, according to an EPA report made public this week which found that fracking chemicals definitely have contaminated water supplies.

From Business
In a first, federal environment officials today scientifically linked underground water pollution with hydraulic fracturing, concluding that contaminants found in central Wyoming were likely caused by the gas drilling process.

The agency's findings could be a turning point in the heated national debate about whether contamination from fracking is happening, and are likely to shape how the country regulates and develops natural gas resources in the Marcellus Shale and across the Eastern Appalachian states.

Some of the findings in the report also directly contradict longstanding arguments by the drilling industry for why the fracking process is safe: that hydrologic pressure would naturally force fluids down, not up; that deep geologic layers provide a watertight barrier preventing the movement of chemicals towards the surface; and that the problems with the cement and steel barriers around gas wells aren't connected to fracking.
Environmental advocates greeted today's report with a sense of vindication and seized the opportunity to argue for stronger federal regulation of fracking.

No one can accurately say that there is no risk where fracking is concerned, wrote Amy Mall, a senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council, on her blog. This draft report makes obvious that there are many factors at play, any one of which can go wrong. Much stronger rules are needed to ensure that well construction standards are stronger and reduce threats to drinking water.


  1. Facts are a pesky thing: form the EPA report and Rueters:

    "So EPA researchers drilled two wells and found lots of chemicals, which could be tied to drilling. For example, they found levels of benzene, which is known to cause cancer and other health effects, far higher than safe drinking water standards. The presence of other chemicals — like synthetic glycols and alcohols — persuaded them that the contamination was likely coming from fracking.

    The EPA has yet to find those synthetic chemicals or benzene in private or public drinking wells."

    The whole EPA report is laced with words: maybe, could, might. The EPA report does not say definativly that fracking contaminated the well water. In fact the two sample wells were drilled well below the water table and were drilled into hydrocarbon bearing rock formations. Hence the natural organics detected.

    This is an EPA and President that has gone to war against American prosperity. Like Michelle Bachman said, "it is time to legalize American energy.

  2. Anon 8:58,

    You lose all credibility when you cite something Michelle Bachman said. Once I saw that the rest of your post went something like this: