how much do any of you really know about this process?
we are pumping fluid and chemicals( fairly low concentrations most of the time) 10 to 15000 feet into the earth, into rock formations that already have the ability to trap gas and oil under huge pressures. we are regulated to run cement bond logs to insure that the casing of the well is sealed above and below each zone. I have even had BLM people in my truck while running cement bond logs to monitor them.
the countries natural gas production in three of our biggest fields ( pinedale anticline, waumsutter, johna ) would be next to nothing without hydraulic fracturing.
we have been doing this for a long,long time. there is nothing new happening. my state does regulate it and requires each fracturing company to tell the state what is in the chemicals/fluid that is being pumped underground. also, i believe that they require the oil companies to support periodic ground water tests for these chemicals. I have never heard of a positive test. we have water treatment facilities in each of the fields mentioned, they bring the water back to drinking quality and then we re-use the treated water in the oilfield. i can only speak of the fields here, but we do manage our wast pretty effectively. the pinedale field has a collection system, they string long plastic pipes to each location where we are working and we pump the wast directly to the treatment facility so that we do not have to use trucks or risk spills.
do you have any questions that you do not want answered by some alarmist news article?
i have only seen parts of the movie, and i have read about it in quite a few articles. This site seems to stick to the differences in the laws and regulation that are easy to verify yourself.
http://www.energyindepth.org/2010/06/debunking-gasland/
to add: the burning water coming from taps has shown to be from wells or pipelines that leak, not from fracturing or chemicals introduced into the well at the time of completions.
Actually we have not been doing it for a long time, at least not in the amounts we are now doing it.
As to the chemicals that are being injected, in fact, we don't know what they are in most states. See the FRAC act which is attempting to get the oil and gas companies to reveal their mixtures:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FRAC_Act
It would require the energy industry to disclose the chemicals it mixes with the water and sand it pumps underground in the hydraulic fracturing process (also known as fracking), information that has largely been protected as trade secrets. Controversy surrounds the practice of hydraulic fracturing as a threat to drinking water supplies.[1] The gas industry opposes the legislation.[2]
Also, fracking is currently exempt from the clean water act.
If you want to have some idea what they are pumping, look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing
CAS Number Chemical Constituent
2634-33-5 1,2 Benzisothiazolin-2-one / 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one
95-63-6 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene
123-91-1 1,4-Dioxane
3452-07-1 1-eicosene
629-73-2 1-hexadecene
112-88-9 1-octadecene
1120-36-1 1-tetradecene
10222-01-2 2,2 Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide , a biocide
27776-21-2 2,2'-azobis-{2-(imidazlin-2-yl)propane}-dihydrochloride
73003-80-2 2,2-Dobromomalonamide
15214-89-8 2-Acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulphonic acid sodium salt polymer
46830-22-2 2-acryloyloxyethyl(benzyl)dimethylammonium chloride
52-51-7 2-Bromo-2-nitro-1,3-propanediol
111-76-2 2-Butoxy ethanol
1113-55-9 2-Dibromo-3-Nitriloprionamide (2-Monobromo-3-nitriilopropionamide)
104-76-7 2-Ethyl Hexanol
67-63-0 2-Propanol / Isopropyl Alcohol / Isopropanol / Propan-2-ol
26062-79-3 2-Propen-1-aminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-2-propenyl-chloride, homopolymer
9003-03-6 2-propenoic acid, homopolymer, ammonium salt
25987-30-8 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with 2 p-propenamide, sodium salt / Copolymer of acrylamide and sodium acrylate
71050-62-9 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with sodium phosphinate (1:1)
66019-18-9 2-propenoic acid, telomer with sodium hydrogen sulfite
107-19-7 2-Propyn-1-ol / Propargyl alcohol
51229-78-8 3,5,7-Triaza-1-azoniatricyclo[3.3.1.13,7]decane, 1-(3-chloro-2-propenyl)-chloride,
115-19-5 3-methyl-1-butyn-3-ol
127087-87-0 4-Nonylphenol Polyethylene Glycol Ether Branched / Nonylphenol ethoxylated / Oxyalkylated Phenol
64-19-7 Acetic acid
68442-62-6 Acetic acid, hydroxy-, reaction products with triethanolamine
108-24-7 Acetic Anhydride
67-64-1 Acetone
79-06-1 Acrylamide
Of course, its as much the quantities that are being injected, as the actual substances. A microgram of arsenic per 10 million gallons of water is nothing to worry about, but 500 pounds would be.
And right now, in most states, no one has any idea of the amounts of these chemicals being injected.
Lastly, as to "Gasland" I would like to find your source that determined that fracking was not the cause of the problem. Just your statement that it was from wells and pipelines that leaked, would seem to indicate that it would at least be possible they leaked from the pressure caused by the injection of millions of gallons of water.
EDIT: It looks like you got your contra Gasland info from Energyindepth.org. And that's and industry sponsored website:
Quoting "Energyindepth" gives me no clue. Reading their site I find:
America's natural gas and oil producers are committed to responsible and environmentally-friendly development of domestic energy resources.
Now that is DEFINITELY an industry sponsored site, and such should not be relied on for a truthful analysis.
I personally believe that dangerous amounts of fracking chemicals are being pumped into underground aquifers. If not, the drilling companies would come out and say how much of what chemicals they are injecting.
And since it can take many years for underground chemicals to travel underground large distances, I am of the sad belief that at some point large water supplies will become contaminated. At which point the public will end up paying to purify the water they drink, and not the companies that injected the chemicals.