PA Fracking waste discharges into PA Rivers

[afishinado]

Article concerning PA Fracking waste discharges into PA Rivers...very concerning.

https://publicherald.org/pennsylvania-is-discharging-radioactive-fracking-waste-into-rivers-as-landfill-leachate-impacting-the-chesapeake-bay-ohio-river-watersheds/?fbclid=IwAR3W-1uNzrhAJn_zvBkuJ7v45snpDVK9H67KA-tbgowVbwYingRMzuYXLYM#.XggcLYgOhjQ.facebook

 

[timmyt2]

No mystery what the deal is with the Susquehanna after you read that article

 

[larkmark]

What the heck is happening to our state and our country. This is crazy.

 

[Fly-Swatter]

Money Money Money Money. MONEY!

 

[timmyt2]

I dont know, what is happening? I'll you whats not happening, i dont hear anyone blasting all the complicit DEMOCRAT politicians mentioned in the article. Some people on this site cry and moan about Trump and the EPA and what a big bad dude he is for the environment CONSTANTLY yet its awfully quiet now that Dems are involved and running this show

Its us against them, regular folks who want to use the resource and protect and enjoy it vs the titans of industry who are in it for the money and care not at all about the resource. I am going to start by calling my local PA rep and seeing what he knows about this. I'll report back here if anything interesting comes of it

 

[Tigereye]

Alot of technical inaccuracies in article. The issue is a complex one, yet again we have a biased article sensationalizing negative aspects of fracking to garner opposition.

If this was an opinion piece I would give author some slack. It is not, technical shortcomings aside.

 

[sgrim]

TigerEye - can you identify or clarify any of the inaccuracies for us?

 

[tomgamber]

timmyt2 wrote:
I dont know, what is happening? I'll you whats not happening, i dont hear anyone blasting all the complicit DEMOCRAT politicians mentioned in the article. Some people on this site cry and moan about Trump and the EPA and what a big bad dude he is for the environment CONSTANTLY yet its awfully quiet now that Dems are involved and running this show

Its us against them, regular folks who want to use the resource and protect and enjoy it vs the titans of industry who are in it for the money and care not at all about the resource. I am going to start by calling my local PA rep and seeing what he knows about this. I'll report back here if anything interesting comes of it

here's a list of the top 20 takers of money from the oil and gas industry. Last one is kind of interesting. Other 2 dems are from TX. Maybe the problem is that not enough are from PA?

Top 20 Members
Candidate Amount
Cornyn, John (R-TX) $482,650
McCarthy, Kevin (R-CA) $368,840
Gardner, Cory (R-CO) $333,391
Scalise, Steve (R-LA) $273,700
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $224,305
Daines, Steven (R-MT) $218,686
Inhofe, James M (R-OK) $187,560
Cassidy, Bill (R-LA) $171,495
Crenshaw, Dan (R-TX) $165,821
Brady, Kevin (R-TX) $153,550
Collins, Susan M (R-ME) $143,425
Cuellar, Henry (D-TX) $128,032
Sullivan, Dan (R-AK) $126,850
McSally, Martha (R-AZ) $118,291
Tillis, Thom (R-NC) $117,034
Fletcher, Lizzie (D-TX) $113,682
Graves, Garret (R-LA) $94,500
Cheney, Liz (R-WY) $94,200
Williams, Roger (R-TX) $93,259
Sanders, Bernie (D) $90,263

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Tigereye]

"if you convert Liters to Gallons (3.785 L/gal) — 8 pCi/L would be 30.28 pCi/gal. If the total discharge from the 15 sewage plants is 575,500,000 million gallons annually then the potential Ra (226 and 228) would be 17,426,140,000 pCi/gal — or 17.4 mCi (millicuries)."

Let's start with the easiest, 575,500,000 million gallons. Or 5.8 x 10^14 gallons. Really. Needs to check his math or his diction.

Secondly and probably more profound, is his claim that somehow by having more total discharge you increase it's concentration. By some process unknown to me, 30.28 pCi/gal mysteriously transforms to 17.4mCi/gal because one has more water. If anything the concentration of isotopes in water is diluted.

Lastly I am not sure he understand what a Curie is. A Curie is a rate of disintegration. Without getting into a nuclear physics lesson, let's just say 17.4 mCi is strong enough to be used in nuclear level guages.

There's more but I think I made my point.

 

[timmyt2]

Tiger you are clearly well versed on the subject, so what are you saying? Its all good if fracking waste is dumped into landfills and leaches out because the numbers are fudged? There really is no threat, its all made up?

 

[Tigereye]

Timmy, there are threats. I don't know what is made up and what is not. My problem is that environmental issues are not simple fixes. Alot of people do not have the technical background to understand the complexities involved. I don't expect them to, as it is just not their field of expertise. I know nothing about car repair, don't know how to fly a plane, and couldn't back up a semi to save my soul. We all have our strengths and weaknesses.

The problem arises when the issue is over simplified and sensationalized to sway opinion. You can not give some one a chemistry or nuclear physics lesson in a newspaper article. But, if you say company X is dumping radioactive waste into a river and spit out huge numbers, people get scared. Rightfully so. That was the objective of the article.

In contrast, the difficult part is having people understand the details of the stituation.

Why are there discharges?Do people know that they are exposed to low level radiation every day of our lives. Cigarettes, concrete, radon in the air we breath, sea salt, X rays, flying on a jet, exposure to the sun and others.There is NORM. Naturally occurring radioactive material everywhere.

I can assure you that fracking companies and landfill operations are well aware of the characteristics of their discharges. Likewise those discharges are scrutinized by PADEP, EPA, the SRBC, DRBC and the local municipality. If there was a threat to human health or Environment, it would be addressed.

I wish it were as simple as:. Radiation=Bad= Stop. It's not. How much is Bad. If STOP , what happens? Job losses, price increases for what products? Dependencies on Foriegn countries for fuel? How is it hurting environment? Which animals plants or ecosystems are affected? In what way, what is the value?

We need to realize we cannot go back and live in the garden of Eden. We need to manage our Civic needs and balance that with environmental concerns. This the whole "Sustainability" movement.

I think we are all Ill served by one sided articles that play to a common denominator. Much more so by erroneous ones.

 

[tomgamber]

That's a great explanation.

You can probably find an article in an oil and gas trade publication that completely contradicts the one in the OP. This is why its so dangerous to discount major news outlets as being biased. I still have had no one be able to tell me how exactly they would benefit from taking a stand on one side or the other of a subject like this. If it's just selling more commercials, remember, for everyone on one side of the argument you placate to you alienate someone from the other so its a wash. Long form journalism is never meant to be biased. You have to find one you can trust. You cannot not trust all of them and consider yourself informed.

The article in the OP is obviously and admittedly meant to be from one point of view. I'm OK with that because I know that going in.

Again though, Tiger. I like that explanation.

I remember logging in Safety-Kleen samples and having to determine what matrix they actually were. They had "rules" to decide of they were even solids, liquids or some other combination of oil and grease. I was glad I didn't have to prep any of that stuff. Just nasty stuff.

 

[brookie222]

One minor observation on the list. Bernie Sanders is formally an Independent, voting with the Democrats.

Other than that, you are spot on. The Senators and Representatives receiving the most funding from the oil and gas industry are overwhelmingly from the Republican party.

Is this list from 2019, another year, or over several years?

 

[Brianh]

None of which are from PA.