# Obama's Attack on Fracking is All About Curtailing US Production



## longknife (Mar 21, 2015)

Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.


Read for yourself @ The Obama Administration s Dishonest Attack on Hydraulic Fracturing


----------



## nat4900 (Mar 21, 2015)

Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source and leads to earthquakes.........PERIOD!!!

Dingbats like you should realize that you peeing in your own pool.....Obama did not go far enough in banning fracking.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Mar 21, 2015)

longknife said:


> Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> 
> 
> Read for yourself @ The Obama Administration s Dishonest Attack on Hydraulic Fracturing



Working so well guy on CNBC the other day said US supplies are now so great they're running out of barrels to put it in.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Mar 21, 2015)

I love the "secret chemical cocktails" charge.....what BS.....total lack of knowledge of how tightly chems are now regulated.


----------



## Freewill (Mar 21, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source and leads to earthquakes.........PERIOD!!!
> 
> Dingbats like you should realize that you peeing in your own pool.....Obama did not go far enough in banning fracking.



Do you have a source of this information?  I wonder because I live withing proablly 1 miles as the bird flies of 5 of these wells.  When can I expect my water to go bad or an Earthquake?  My neighbors would also like to know.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 21, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source and leads to earthquakes.........PERIOD!!!
> 
> Dingbats like you should realize that you peeing in your own pool.....Obama did not go far enough in banning fracking.


 
*Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source*

How many water sources have been damaged?

*and leads to earthquakes.....*

There were no earthquakes before fracking?

*Obama did not go far enough in banning fracking.*

His green supporters will never be satisfied.


----------



## Moonglow (Mar 21, 2015)

It's only for fracking operations on public land...


----------



## nat4900 (Mar 21, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> *Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source*
> 
> How many water sources have been damaged?
> 
> ...


a

Oh, you actually want a date.....try Revelation in the Bible.

Look, I don't have any idea when it will happen....but I wish you luck,

I'd bet that you also believe in creationism and that global warming is just another liberal ploy.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 21, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > *Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source*
> ...



In other words, you don't have a shred of evidence to support your idiotic claims.

Thanks for playing!


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 21, 2015)

longknife said:


> Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> 
> 
> Read for yourself @ The Obama Administration s Dishonest Attack on Hydraulic Fracturing


The people doing the most damage to fracking is Saudi Arabia who is quickly bankrupting our fracking companies by breaking with the rest of OPEC's members and maintaining their level of oil production.  Low oil prices are bad for fracking.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 21, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> ...


Quit trying to deflect the discussion from Obama's deliberate attempts to destroy the fossil fuel industry.

No one is fooled.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 21, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > longknife said:
> ...


During his administration America has become the largest producer of oil on the planet.  So GFY.


----------



## nat4900 (Mar 21, 2015)

Bottom line, right wingers...."Go frack yourselves"............


----------



## Freewill (Mar 21, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> ...



But good for consumers, why have artificially high prices?  Eventually the price will rise again.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 21, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...


Only idiots believe Obama had anything to do with it.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Mar 21, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> nat4900 said:
> 
> 
> > Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source and leads to earthquakes.........PERIOD!!!
> ...



Fracking Led to Ohio Earthquakes


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 21, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > nat4900 said:
> ...



How big were these earthquakes?  Did they even make the china rattle?  Were any deaths or injuries reported?

The whole "fracking earthquake" thing is just another fuex crisis.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Mar 21, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



My take is simple, I'm not a physical scientist and I don't believe anything you or the rest of your kind post.  I'll listen to the science, since you and the other clowns on the right have an agenda; a real scientist seeks understanding - they have an open mind and our curious, you lack both.

No one is suggesting a crisis exists, but having experienced the 1989 Loma Prieta quake, and a dozen smaller ones over the years, I'd prefer fracking be restricted in California, especially near large and known faults.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 21, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > *Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source*
> ...


 
Put down the bong and try that one again. LOL!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 21, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > nat4900 said:
> ...


 
Lubricate the plates and they're more likely to slide. And?


----------



## rdean (Mar 21, 2015)

longknife said:


> Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> 
> 
> Read for yourself @ The Obama Administration s Dishonest Attack on Hydraulic Fracturing


Thanks for the link.  I got to post this:

No one can possibly believe this crap. Since Obama has been president, America has become number one in energy production, number one in natural gas and soon to be number one in oil. 
That doesn't happen when the president is trying to "disrupt" energy production. Just more "hate Obama for everything even if it's not true".


----------



## nat4900 (Mar 21, 2015)

rdean said:


> Just more "hate Obama for everything even if it's not true".




Indeed.......remember a few years ago someone stated that even _IF_ Obama "walked on water" he'd be accused of not being able to swim.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 21, 2015)

rdean said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> ...


 
*Since Obama has been president, America has become number one in energy production, number one in natural gas and soon to be number one in oil.*

How much has production increased on Federal land?
On private land?


----------



## Stephanie (Mar 21, 2015)

If it can hurt us Obama is all for it. I think the majority of the people has figured that out by now


----------



## nat4900 (Mar 21, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> How much has production increased on Federal land?
> On private land?




Well, either you already "think" you know the answer.....or you're here to be educated.....Which is it?


----------



## HenryBHough (Mar 21, 2015)

The boi just won't face it.  His plan to make energy prices skyrocket to help Algore save the planet has failed.  Failed.

These recent actions?

Not really intended to accomplish anything.

Just temper tantrums.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Mar 21, 2015)

"Obama's Attack on Fracking is All About Curtailing US Production"

Yet another lie from the right, the president isn't 'attacking' anything.

The policy applies solely to drilling on Federal land, representing less than 12 percent of the overall industry.


----------



## rdean (Mar 21, 2015)

HenryBHough said:


> The boi just won't face it.  His plan to make energy prices skyrocket to help Algore save the planet has failed.  Failed.
> 
> These recent actions?
> 
> ...


This is why so many Republicans are outright dirty racist creeps.  The only time I've heard a gray haired 50 year old man called boy or boi or manchild is if he is black by fucking ignorant right wing racists.  Such dirty and nasty people.  Worse, I suspect they are the vast majority of the GOP.


----------



## nat4900 (Mar 21, 2015)

rdean said:


> This is why so many Republicans are outright dirty racist creeps. The only time I've heard a gray haired 50 year old man called boy or boi or manchild is if he is black by fucking ignorant right wing racists. Such dirty and nasty people. Worse, I suspect they are the vast majority of the GOP.




Some (maybe most right wingers) try to hide their racism as best they can.....others....well, they can't help themselves......


----------



## Mr. H. (Mar 21, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source and leads to earthquakes.........PERIOD!!!
> 
> Dingbats like you should realize that you peeing in your own pool.....Obama did not go far enough in banning fracking.


And I thought you were of the "party of science". 
Get educated then get back to us. 

A 29 kiloton nuclear device detonated at the bottom of a 4,200 ft. well doesn't even pose a danger to water sources (other than the obvious radioactivity). 

The Center for Land Use Interpretation


----------



## HenryBHough (Mar 21, 2015)

When confronted with reality and unable to refute, shout RACIST.

Game's up:


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 21, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > How much has production increased on Federal land?
> ...


 
Asking a liberal to educate me? LOL!
That's funny.

Do you think Obama did anything to encourage oil and gas production?
If so, what did he do?


----------



## nat4900 (Mar 21, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Asking a liberal to educate me? LOL!
> That's funny.
> 
> Do you think Obama did anything to encourage oil and gas production?
> If so, what did he do?




Gee, I don't know......maybe he boiled some eggs on a gas stove?


----------



## HenryBHough (Mar 21, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Gee, I don't know......maybe he boiled some eggs on a gas stove?



Maybe ate some beans and cauliflower?


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 21, 2015)

rdean said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> ...



Yes it does happen when the president is trying to disrupt energy production.  All the increased production is on private land, where Obama has no control.  production on federal lands is down sharply.

You have to be a certified moron to believe Obama deserves any credit for increased oil and gas production.  What has he done to promote the production of fossil fuels?  The answer is nothing.  Everything he has done is designed to reduce the production of fossil fuels.

All you post shows is that liberal turds have an infinite capacity for self-delusion or outright lying.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 21, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > longknife said:
> ...


----------



## Decus (Mar 21, 2015)

OPEC hates US fracking......or is that the fracking US?

Fracking has been an enormous advantage to the American economy and our energy independence. We should be supporting it and not trying to impede it.

.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 21, 2015)

Freewill said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > longknife said:
> ...


Yes that's what the Saudi's want.  And they will have badly damaged the U.S. fracking industry by then.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 21, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Funny you'll blame Obama for everything in the world except this!


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 21, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...



Why would any intelligent person believe Obama had anything to with promoting something he had announced his opposition to?  Even now he is in the process of passing regulations to cripple the fracking industry.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 21, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> Freewill said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...



The fracking industry can rebound as quickly as it grew in the first place - faster even.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 21, 2015)

Cumulative count of earthquakes with a magnitude ≥ 3.0 in the central and eastern United States,1970-2013. The dashed line corresponds to the long-term rate of 20.2 earthquakes per year, with an increase in the rate of earthquake events starting around 2009.
The number of earthquakes has increased dramatically over the past few years within the central and eastern United States. Nearly 450 earthquakes magnitude 3.0 and larger occurred in the four years from 2010-2013, over 100 per year on average, compared with an average rate of 20 earthquakes per year observed from 1970-2000.

This increase in earthquakes prompts two important questions: Are they natural, or man-made? And what should be done in the future as we address the causes and consequences of these events to reduce associated risks? USGS scientists have been analyzing the changes in the rate of earthquakes as well as the likely causes, and they have some answers.

USGS scientists have found that at some locations the increase in seismicity coincides with the injection of wastewater in deep disposal wells. Much of this wastewater is a byproduct of oil and gas production and is routinely disposed of by injection into wells specifically designed for this purpose.

Man-Made Earthquakes Update Science Features

*As the cost of the earthquakes created by the energy industry increases, you may see an economic reason for the decline in fracking.*


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 21, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Cumulative count of earthquakes with a magnitude ≥ 3.0 in the central and eastern United States,1970-2013. The dashed line corresponds to the long-term rate of 20.2 earthquakes per year, with an increase in the rate of earthquake events starting around 2009.
> The number of earthquakes has increased dramatically over the past few years within the central and eastern United States. Nearly 450 earthquakes magnitude 3.0 and larger occurred in the four years from 2010-2013, over 100 per year on average, compared with an average rate of 20 earthquakes per year observed from 1970-2000.
> 
> This increase in earthquakes prompts two important questions: Are they natural, or man-made? And what should be done in the future as we address the causes and consequences of these events to reduce associated risks? USGS scientists have been analyzing the changes in the rate of earthquakes as well as the likely causes, and they have some answers.
> ...


 
Releasing energy early = less damage.


----------



## Freewill (Mar 21, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Cumulative count of earthquakes with a magnitude ≥ 3.0 in the central and eastern United States,1970-2013. The dashed line corresponds to the long-term rate of 20.2 earthquakes per year, with an increase in the rate of earthquake events starting around 2009.
> The number of earthquakes has increased dramatically over the past few years within the central and eastern United States. Nearly 450 earthquakes magnitude 3.0 and larger occurred in the four years from 2010-2013, over 100 per year on average, compared with an average rate of 20 earthquakes per year observed from 1970-2000.
> 
> This increase in earthquakes prompts two important questions: Are they natural, or man-made? And what should be done in the future as we address the causes and consequences of these events to reduce associated risks? USGS scientists have been analyzing the changes in the rate of earthquakes as well as the likely causes, and they have some answers.
> ...



From the article:

Big Earthquakes Double in 2014 But They re Not Linked

The rise in earthquakes is statistically similar to the results of flipping a coin, Parsons said: Sometimes heads or tails will repeat several times in a row, even though the process is random.

"Basically, we can't prove that what we saw during the first part of 2014, as well as since 2010, isn't simply a similar thing to getting six tails in a row," he said.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Mar 21, 2015)

"Obama's Attack on Fracking is All About Curtailing US Production"

This is another example of the right's attack on the truth.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 21, 2015)

Yup, that's why we are the world's number 1 producer in natural gas and have gone up 50% and will soon be the world's number 1 producer in petroleum.  What a bunch lametards.

*Obama's Attack on Fracking is All About Curtailing US Production*


----------



## Vigilante (Mar 21, 2015)




----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 22, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Cumulative count of earthquakes with a magnitude ≥ 3.0 in the central and eastern United States,1970-2013. The dashed line corresponds to the long-term rate of 20.2 earthquakes per year, with an increase in the rate of earthquake events starting around 2009.
> ...


Sheesh. Someday, sometime, idiots like you will learn to look up things like how the Richter scale works.


----------



## Stephanie (Mar 22, 2015)

nat4900 said:


> Fracking is inherently dangerous to our water source and leads to earthquakes.........PERIOD!!!
> 
> Dingbats like you should realize that you peeing in your own pool.....Obama did not go far enough in banning fracking.



You're such a parrot of nothing. A walking talking expert on everything. zzzzz


----------



## longknife (Mar 22, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



Actually, if claims are right, fracking produces minor slippage in faults which reduce the overall probability of having a major one.

Most earthquakes are nothing more than abrupt movement of teutonic plates when the stress becomes strong enough. Allow minor movements and it makes sense that stronger movement would be eased.

I remember way back when I was a kid that scientists in California proposed injecting millions of gallons of sea water into major faults to reduce the probability of major quakes

I was born the year in the massive quake in the Los Angeles area - 1939. An omen?


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



The Richter scale has nothing to do with what he said.  Furthermore, your map shows that most of these Earthquakes are occurring in areas where there is no fracking occurring.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 22, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


 
The Richter scale means an earthquake now, instead of a larger earthquake later, is worse? LOL!


----------



## Wry Catcher (Mar 22, 2015)

longknife said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



I couldn't find a massive quake in SoCal in 1939, in my search I found this related fact, just today Perry, OK had two shocks over 3.0

see:  Earthquakes


----------



## Wry Catcher (Mar 22, 2015)

More:

Fracking Fingered 100 Earthquakes In Oklahoma CleanTechnica

Oklahoma Earthquakes

I suppose bripat has some explanation which defies reality but supports his biases.  We don't know if fracking is causing these events, but he sure as hell has nothing but his opinions to support his usual bullshit.


----------



## Care4all (Mar 22, 2015)

There is more oil than money can buy right now.....this article DID NOT PROVIDE much in information...

But it did say this was for federal land....not State or privately owned land....and I am fine with that....let's save what oil is in Federally owned land for our reserve, for the time we may really need it.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Mar 22, 2015)

I suppose it will take a major quake, and even then the crazy right wing on this message board will still be sure this form of oil extraction is safe, and it's just the liberals who hate billionaires who believe fracking isn't benign.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



You mean they were 3.3?  Anything under 5 is barely detectable.  Again, was any body injured? Was there any damage? Otherwise, shut the fuck up.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> I suppose it will take a major quake, and even then the crazy right wing on this message board will still be sure this form of oil extraction is safe, and it's just the liberals who hate billionaires who believe fracking isn't benign.


Yes, it will take a quake that actually injures someone or causes any kind of damage.  Otherwise, no one gives a flying fuck.  It's just a bunch of kooks shouting "the sky is falling."


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

Care4all said:


> There is more oil than money can buy right now.....this article DID NOT PROVIDE much in information...
> 
> But it did say this was for federal land....not State or privately owned land....and I am fine with that....let's save what oil is in Federally owned land for our reserve, for the time we may really need it.



Remember when you enviro-kooks used to say we couldn't drill our way of the problem of high oil prices?  

Why should anyone believe a thing you say about the issue now?


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> More:
> 
> Fracking Fingered 100 Earthquakes In Oklahoma CleanTechnica
> 
> ...



What caused all the Earth quakes in Missouri and Arkansas?   How about the ones in Souther Illinois?  Did fracking cause those?

Will eco-nutburgers ever learn that their idiot theories have no scentific basis?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

And you all are missing the point: this administration is far better than the lat four in creating an enviable energy platform of petroleum and alternative sources.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> And you all are missing the point: this administration is far better than the lat four in creating an enviable energy platform of petroleum and alternative sources.



BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Obama created an "enviable energy platform?"

You're a riot, Fakey!


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

Those are your silly words, bripat, not mine.

The fact is that we are number 1 in NG and getting there in petroleum.

Those who think like you have no political punch whatsoever in any of this.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> And you all are missing the point: this administration is far better than the lat four in creating an enviable energy platform of petroleum and alternative sources.


 
LOL! I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Those are your silly words, bripat, not mine.
> 
> The fact is that we are number 1 in NG and getting there in petroleum.
> 
> Those who think like you have no political punch whatsoever in any of this.



So what policy of Obama's is responsible for this outcome?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

The facts speak for themselves.

You guys don't like it, who cares?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The facts speak for themselves.
> 
> You guys don't like it, who cares?


 
Exactly! He wanted to restrict supply, reduce demand and make fossil fuel more expensive.
We now produce more, consume more and the price has fallen.
The facts speak for themselves.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

And it happened on his watch, so we give him credit for it as well as the expansion of alternative fuels.

We are a blessed nation.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 22, 2015)




----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The facts speak for themselves.
> 
> You guys don't like it, who cares?



Yes they do.  You obviously can't name anything Obama did to increase oil production in the USA.

Thanks for playing!


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

The facts speak for themselves, and all you can do is cry.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The facts speak for themselves, and all you can do is cry.



Yes, the facts do speak for themselves:  You can't name one policy from Obama that increased the production of oil in the USA.

That is a fact.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

During Obama's admin NG is number one and petroleum is almost number one and alternative fuel sources made great strides.

Didn't happen under Bush or with his policies.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> During Obama's admin NG is number one and petroleum is almost number one and alternative fuel sources made great strides.
> 
> Didn't happen under Bush or with his policies.



You still haven't named a single Obama policy that had anything to do with it.

Who do you think you're fooling?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

Don't have to.  Just look at the results of more than Obama's six years in office; they speaking for him.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

Yup, leaves you speechless.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

H


JakeStarkey said:


> Don't have to.  Just look at the results of more than Obama's six years in office; they speaking for him.



Here are the results on drilling since Obama ascended the throne.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

Protecting the environment (good stewardship for the American people) while encouraging and increasing private sector growth and profits (good capitalism).


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Protecting the environment (good stewardship for the American people) while encouraging and increasing private sector growth and profits (good capitalism).



You're Alzheimer's is reaching the terminal phase.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

Thank you for your clear admission of defeat, bripat.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Thank you for your clear admission of defeat, bripat.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)




----------



## initforme (Mar 22, 2015)

Fracking companies have run of the mill... the attack on them is about as legit as the attack on women.  To heck with them they are doing fine.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The facts speak for themselves, and all you can do is cry.


 
Obama failed, he's the one crying.
American ingenuity defeated his idiocy.


----------



## mudwhistle (Mar 22, 2015)

longknife said:


> Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> 
> 
> Read for yourself @ The Obama Administration s Dishonest Attack on Hydraulic Fracturing


Notice how Obama has no shame in taking credit for the drop in gas prices while doing everything he can in secret to get rid of the reason for the drop in prices.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

mudwhistle said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> ...



Taking credit for stuff he didn't do is one of his main skills.  Pointing the finger of blame at others is his other main skill.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The facts speak for themselves, and all you can do is cry.
> ...



If that idiocy comforts you, Todd, so be it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

The nonsense above from guys who do not contribute to a better America.


----------



## initforme (Mar 22, 2015)

There should be no regulations right?  If it were in my back yard I'd throw up such a stink they'd have wished they'd never thought about it.  Fracking should not occur within 50 miles of any town.  Its not meant for that.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 22, 2015)

initforme said:


> There should be no regulations right?  If it were in my back yard I'd throw up such a stink they'd have wished they'd never thought about it.  Fracking should not occur within 50 miles of any town.  Its not meant for that.



That would pretty much eliminate fracking.

Fracking is as safe as baking bread.  If someone can demonstrate harm, they are free to sue.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 22, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


 
No, Obama's idiocy does not comfort me.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 22, 2015)

Tough.  We get an election in November next year, and I bet you he won't be on the ticket.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 22, 2015)

Hopefully his idiocy does no long-term damage to the world.
He has made Jimmy Carter a happy man.


----------



## longknife (Mar 23, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


 Sorry it was the Torrance/Gardena quake of 41 - did a lot of damage and I remember my Dad driving me through to see the damage.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 23, 2015)

longknife, are you like 90?  I am not making fun.  Just wow.  Congrats on living so long and seeing so much.


----------



## longknife (Mar 23, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> longknife, are you like 90?  I am not making fun.  Just wow.  Congrats on living so long and seeing so much.



Actually only 75  -76 in June - but I have an amazing clear memory. I can clearly remember Auction City in the south basin along with all the dairies where my parents bought fresh milk and butter right after the war.


----------



## Bleipriester (Mar 23, 2015)

longknife said:


> Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> 
> 
> Read for yourself @ The Obama Administration s Dishonest Attack on Hydraulic Fracturing


Although Obama is now against fracking, it remains a dangerous and crazy venture. This is not a political issue to be used for bashing but a serious problem, America´s future generations will pay for.

Pennsylvania Finally Reveals Fracking Has Contaminated Drinking Water Hundreds Of Times ThinkProgress
Fracking-Harmed Residents Confront EPA and Demand Reopened Investigation Environmental Action


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 23, 2015)

Bleipriester said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another one of those articles the Obamabots will attack because of its source. They will ignore the links and citations and claim its all about “saving the environment.” They will conveniently ignore Obama's continued promises to wipe out the Amnerican coal and oil industry.
> ...



Those are both hoaxes.  No one's drinking water has been contaminated by fracking.  There has never been a shortage of kooks who claim they have been contaminated by some industry.   There are also plenty of opportunist who are too shy to lie and launch frivolous lawsuits to extort money from corporations.


----------



## Bleipriester (Mar 23, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > longknife said:
> ...


I saw a documentation on TV. The water around the wells is deadly and the companies exchange drinking water for "silence".


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 23, 2015)

Industry illegally injected about 3 billion gallons of fracking wastewater into central California drinking-water and farm-irrigation aquifers, the state found after the US Environmental Protection Agency ordered a review of possible contamination.

According to documents obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity, the California State Water Resources Board found that at least nine of the 11 hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, wastewater injection sites that were shut down in July upon suspicion of contamination were in fact riddled with toxic fluids used to unleash energy reserves deep underground. The aquifers, protected by state law and the federal Safe Water Drinking Act, supply quality water in a state currently sufferingunprecedented drought.

The documents also show that the Central Valley Water Board found high levels of toxic chemicals - including arsenic, thallium, and nitrates - in water-supply wells near the wastewater-disposal sites.

Arsenic is a carcinogen that weakens the immune system, and thallium is a common component in rat poison.

_“Arsenic and thallium are extremely dangerous chemicals,”_ said Timothy Krantz, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Redlands, according to the Center for Biological Diversity.

_“The fact that high concentrations are showing up in multiple water wells close to wastewater injection sites raises major concerns about the health and safety of nearby residents.

California aquifers contaminated with billions of gallons of fracking wastewater RT USA

*Only a few billion gallons.*_


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 23, 2015)

In Pennsylvania, the closer you live to a well used to hydraulically fracture underground shale for natural gas, the more likely it is that your drinking water is contaminated with methane. This conclusion, in a study published in the _Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA_ in July, is a first step in determining whether fracking in the Marcellus Shale underlying much of Pennsylvania is responsible for tainted drinking water in that region.

Robert Jackson, a chemical engineer at Duke University, found methane in 115 of 141 shallow, residential drinking-water wells. The methane concentration in homes less than one mile from a fracking well was six times higher than the concentration in homes farther away. Isotopes and traces of ethane in the methane indicated that the gas was not created by microorganisms living in groundwater but by heat and pressure thousands of feet down in the Marcellus Shale, which is where companies fracture rock to release gas that rises up a well shaft.

Most groundwater supplies are only a few hundred feet deep, but if the protective metal casing and concrete around a fracking well are leaky, methane can escape into them. The study does not prove that fracking has contaminated specific drinking-water wells, however. “I have no agenda to stop fracking,” Jackson says. He notes that drilling companies often construct wells properly. But by denying even the possibility that some wells may leak, the drilling companies have undermined their own credibility.

Groundwater Contamination May End the Gas-Fracking Boom - Scientific American

*Scientific American. Not just a newspaper article.*


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 24, 2015)

Bleipriester said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...



They "exchange drinking water?"  What does that mean, and how does it insure silence.  If a third party has their drinking water contaminated, they can sue the guilty parties.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 24, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> In Pennsylvania, the closer you live to a well used to hydraulically fracture underground shale for natural gas, the more likely it is that your drinking water is contaminated with methane. This conclusion, in a study published in the _Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA_ in July, is a first step in determining whether fracking in the Marcellus Shale underlying much of Pennsylvania is responsible for tainted drinking water in that region.
> 
> Robert Jackson, a chemical engineer at Duke University, found methane in 115 of 141 shallow, residential drinking-water wells. The methane concentration in homes less than one mile from a fracking well was six times higher than the concentration in homes farther away. Isotopes and traces of ethane in the methane indicated that the gas was not created by microorganisms living in groundwater but by heat and pressure thousands of feet down in the Marcellus Shale, which is where companies fracture rock to release gas that rises up a well shaft.
> 
> ...



WV MetroNews Duke research fracking not to blame for groundwater contamination

How Anti-Fracking Activists Deny Science Water Contamination

Fracking doesn t contaminate water supplies faulty shale gas wells do - Telegraph


----------



## Bleipriester (Mar 24, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Yeah, sue a billion dollar lobby...
What that means? The residents take cash (and fresh water) and shut up.


----------



## initforme (Mar 24, 2015)

"
Click to expand...
Those are both hoaxes. No one's drinking water has been contaminated by fracking. There has never been a shortage of kooks who claim they have been contaminated by some industry. There are also plenty of opportunist who are too shy to lie and launch frivolous lawsuits to extort money from corporations."

Well if groundwater gets contaminate its usually industry doing it.  They should be sued to the gills if they are indeed guilty.  The water is not theirs to pollute.  I have no faith in them at all to do things the right way.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 24, 2015)

Bleipriester said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...



Happens all the time.  There are even hedge funds that will finance lawsuits in exchange for a percentage of any damages awarded.  The Sierra Club and other environmental groups sue giant corporations all the time, and the law says they get all their legal expenses paid for from the settlement.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 24, 2015)

initforme said:


> "
> Click to expand...
> Those are both hoaxes. No one's drinking water has been contaminated by fracking. There has never been a shortage of kooks who claim they have been contaminated by some industry. There are also plenty of opportunist who are too shy to lie and launch frivolous lawsuits to extort money from corporations."
> 
> Well if groundwater gets contaminate its usually industry doing it.  They should be sued to the gills if they are indeed guilty.  The water is not theirs to pollute.  I have no faith in them at all to do things the right way.



There's nothing more common than seepage of natural gas or oil into groundwater.  There are many places where you can set natural springs on fire.  This has been true for thousands of years.  5000 years ago tar bubbling up in natural springs in Mesopotamia was used as mortar to glue the Ziggurates together.


----------



## Bleipriester (Mar 24, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Some affected residents don´t have the power of organizations and that matters the more the more politicians are involved in belittling problem.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 24, 2015)

Bleipriester said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...



They don't need an organization.  Law firms will market their case to hedge funds who will finance it in return for a percentage of the settlement.  It's done all the time.


----------



## Bleipriester (Mar 24, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


And were the hedge funds successful in saving the drinking water?


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 24, 2015)

Bleipriester said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...



They probably wouldn't invest in these cases because they look like big losers filed by nutburgers.


----------



## KissMy (Mar 24, 2015)

60% in Republican Texas town that is the birthplace of fracking & has been supported by fracking just voted to ban it.


----------



## initforme (Mar 26, 2015)

iit makes sense to let townspeople vote on whether fracking can happen. If they don't want it near them, then no fracking. Power in the hands of the people, not the industry. If they want it, then so be it.


----------

