jOe and Last Dollar,
Im a bit sensitive about talk about petroleum production, hydraulic fracturing and the environment. Ive spent the last 34 years working as geologist. I have 15 years experience in petroleum geology and 19 years experience in environmental geology. The environmental initiatives that began in the 1970s have done a lot to improve our environment. However, there are groups who are all too willing to bring up bogus environmental issues, while actually working towards a different agenda. For instance, when I lived in Naperville IL I shot trap at an in town trap range that had its start back in the 1940s when it was still farmland. A neighbor who was tired of hearing gunfire every Wednesday night and Sunday took the City of Naperville to court claiming that lead was polluting his well. His well was over 1,000 deep, of that 1,000 of over-burden at least 500 was impermeable clay. When he went to court he didnt even have an analyzed water sample to back up his claims, yet for some reason the burden of proof was put on the City of Naperville. Naperville won the suit, but from that point on only steel shot was allowed. Much of the pollution claims being associated with hydraulic fracturing are based on the same types of agendas. Typically, when a claim is scientifically analyzed it can be shown that the pollution was naturally occurring (theyre called natural oil-seeps and 100 years ago, and even today, theyre used to find oil) or quite often the oil or gas is coming from an old oil well that wasnt abandoned properly or even a new oil well that wasnt completed properly. Yes, in those two cases the problem was traced back to oil wells, but it had nothing to do with hydraulic fracturing.
Steve
