Project would bring 400,000 tons of drilling waste to Pa.’s ‘Grand Canyon’

[PocketWater]

http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2015/07/13/project-would-bring-400000-tons-of-drilling-waste-to-pa-s-grand-canyon/

I hope they don't do this. Seems ludacris to even risk it.

 

[JackM]

That's better than 800,000 tons in my backyard. Pass the extraction tax, keep the impact fees, it is the only way we can make sure our natural environment isn't raped for someone's short term profit as happened with coal, among other things.

 

[Fishidiot]

We have consistently gathered the many threads on fracking in the Conservation forum. As such, this thread will be moved shortly.
Thanks,
DaveW

 

[CLSports]

Why don't they just dump the material off the coast of NJ and create some of those artificial "palm tree" islands like they have in Dubai. A win-win for sure.

 

[krayfish2]

Yo Jack, the extraction tax you want passed is going to fund schools as Fast Eddie Jr promised. By 'funding schools', he means state employee benefits and pensions. I like your idea better but it would never happen.

 

[JackM]

Well, we part ways then because I do not mind paying teachers well enough to attract talent to the career.

 

[franklin]

If the same materials were excavated from a quarry and mixed into concrete to make the runway would anyone even know how it compares to the drilling waste? Not likely. Is there much of a difference?

 

[JackM]

No, I am confident that drilling waste is in fact good for the environment-- we should produce and inject even more of it in the ground to really get the full benefit.

 

[McSneek]

JackM wrote:
Well, we part ways then because I do not mind paying teachers well enough to attract talent to the career.

As long as there are teachers unions "talent" will play second fiddle to "seniority."

Would like some perspective on just how much 400,000 tons of any kind of fill is. A 600' runway extension doesn't seem very long to me. What about all the other chemicals like fuel that are already housed at the airport? What about the effects of run off on any length of airport runway.

I also would like a better understanding of what is really in this drilling "waste" compared to anything else that comes out of the ground.

 

[JackM]

McSneek wrote:

JackM wrote:
Well, we part ways then because I do not mind paying teachers well enough to attract talent to the career.

As long as there are teachers unions "talent" will play second fiddle to "seniority."

Not to get too far off topic, but, I would suggest that if school districts came to teachers with a proposal this year for a 30% increase in salaries in exchange for a merit system of promotion or retention, the Unions would jump at it. Just my opinion.

 

[franklin]

JackM wrote:
No, I am confident that drilling waste is in fact good for the environment-- we should produce and inject even more of it in the ground to really get the full benefit.

Putting it in concrete is likely better for the environment than any of the other disposal approaches. In addition we really don't know (or at least the article doesn't inform us) how the waste stacks up against that removed from road projects or even from quarries. Or any analysis of how safe/unsafe it is.

Everyone is simply reacting to the fact that it came from a drilling operation.

 

[PAgeologist]

The problem with putting it in concrete is that most of the rock is probably not suitable for use in concrete. Most shales have high sulfide concentrations which are bad for the durability and strength of concrete. There are a fair amount of sandstones in PA which have the same characteristics. Also, you have to consider the low strength and durability of the rock. This would be the case regardless of what source the rock came from (drilling, road work, quarry, etc.).

 

[FarmerDave]

I know, we can ship it to China and then they can put it in dry wall and ship it back to us! :-x

 

[lineman]

Our honorable governor and the teacher's unions could collaborate on a new, all concrete, union hall/rotunda combination building and put it smack dab in the middle of Harrisburg. Raise impact fees some more and build a real nice fancy place. That'll use up some drilling waste.

How many making the drilling industry out to be the big bad wolf use natural gas in their everyday lives? Heat your home, run your appliances, co-generate your electricity?

Hypocrisy perhaps?

 

[MKern]

I love how most of the people on here that are in favor of fracking either live in the lower half of the state (where you don't see it everyday), work for a gas company, or have leased their land to a gas company.

And yes I converted my house to natural gas to save my family money because my salary is comparable to to others with comparable time served and education level. BTW, bet you can't guess what my occupation is?

 

[lineman]

Apiculturist?

FWIW, drilling waste and fracking are nonsynonymous.

 

[McSneek]

MKern wrote:
I love how most of the people on here that are in favor of fracking either live in the lower half of the state (where you don't see it everyday), work for a gas company, or have leased their land to a gas company.

And yes I converted my house to natural gas to save my family money because my salary is comparable to to others with comparable time served and education level. BTW, bet you can't guess what my occupation is?

So as a teacher you obviously don't work for a gas company. I would argue you live in the lower half of the State (no fracking going on in Lewistown). Do you lease land to a gas company?

Converting to natural gas is a great way to save on your heating bills and reduce dependence on electricity that may have been generated from a less environmentally friendly source than natural gas.

No one has yet convinced me that natural gas fracking can't be done in an environmentally safe way.

 

[JackM]

McSneek wrote:

No one has yet convinced me that natural gas fracking can't be done in an environmentally safe way.

Well, I won't try to carry that burden of persuasion, but I would try to convince you that we are failing in many cases to do just that. I favor a safe extraction of natural gas through fracking and a fair fee to compensate neighbors and state and local government that bear an unfair burden of costs resulting from this profit-making activity.

 

[MKern]

I do currently live in Lewistown, but grew up in Williamsport and all of my family lives there. (Side note: moved to Lewistown for a teaching job because schools were already cutting positions because of budget constraint so)

I completely agree, if fracking can be done safely and ethically then I am all for it. However, from my observations, many times if a gas company can cut corners or fell that they can slip a violation by without anyone noticing, they try.
Also, home many instances have their been when fracking chemicals leak out somewhere unexpected.

Why did we rush into this and not step back and think it through? History is repeating itself he in PA: logging and coal. The gas isn't going anywhere.

 

[RyanR]

A 30% increase in salaries? Over how many years? That's an absurd notion but of course exactly as expected. Nowhere else in the real world is that a reasonable and sustainable proposal yet it's exactly the kind of thing Democrat-led teachers unions feel they are entitled too. I'm all for paying teachers sound, reasonable salaries with good benefits and none of the teachers I know are even close to living on food stamps. Unfortunately too much of that extraction tax money is by and large destined for Harrisburg, Philly and Pittsburgh.

I love how the people here that are against fracking automatically believe that no one living in extraction areas but not associated with the gas companies is against fracking. And by the way, I support logging too. Try wiping with plastic. (And the fact is logging and the early successional habitat it creates, are part of a healthy, well-managed forest.)