Powerful Opportunities

Back to article »

  • Yes Bill, your’s is good advice; but we have a whole generation or two who have the ‘leisure’ of N.I.M.B.Yism. There is risk in progress.

    Seems to me that there are activists all over the world today. Our’s are comfortably against prosperity.

    gordon stanfield | January 28, 2012 | Reply

  • Bill, your comments are very appropriate and timely, on this subject!

    I have been dealing with groundwater contamination and well water supply issues for about 30 years. Julian’s comments, in my opinion, represent one end of the spectrum in the arguments for and against horizontal fracking (HF).

    In my experience, the issue always revolves around money and risk. In each geologic basin and hydrogeologic (i.e., water supply) area, will be unique. Companies have been obviously historically focused on spending money to find and map the gas resource. With HF, money also needs to be spent on integrating the geology, with the geomechanics and hydrogeology of that area; this will enable assessment of the risk to overlying groundwater resource.

    Companies interested in HF need the motivation, either through spectific requlation, or preferably to gain community acceptance, to spend the monies necessary to demonstate safe development of the resource (i.e., without unacceptable risk). Risk that ultimately the requlators (and hopefully the public), are willing to accept.

    To say that HF can never be used with acceptable risk, is not reasonable. If a gas resources is to be developed, the onus is on both the company to prove the risk is acceptable and the requlator, to reasonably and fairly evaluate their case.

    Harold

    Harold | January 23, 2012 | Reply

  • Bill,

    Water supplies are forever. They are a life source. Once destroyed through underground contamination that’s it – no more drinking water for that community. The comparative examples you use are simply ridiculous. You can’t simply compensate a homeowner if their source of clean water is destroyed, they have no water…

    Ultimately it is the community that should decide if that is a risk they are willing to take – not government and not you.

    And by the way, the risks are not low as you suggest, they are unknown with the proposed form of fracking.

    Often I agree with you article Bill but this one is just plain uninformed.

    Fracking is bad and most importantly irreversible.

    Most importantly we need to be looking at truly renewable sources of energy as well as innovative ways to conserve energy. For our children’s sake.

    Julian | January 23, 2012 | Reply

    • Thanks for your comment.

      Do you know of any reliable statistics on problem rates with fracking wells?

      I have a feeling that they arevery low but doubt whether there is a concensus between drillers and environmentalists.

      I guess there is a point where the compensation for a homeowner can work. If there was a million barrels of oil under someone’s farm I suspect the farmer and the oil company could reach an agreement satisfactory to both.

      Bill

      Bill | January 23, 2012 | Reply