Hydrofracking question.

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by bunnyversusworld, Feb 29, 2012.

Page 3 of 7
  1. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    See, now I know you're just trolling.

    Here's why:
    And this:
    And this:
    So I have already pointed out several times that the green portion was insufficient. The report (the one that I linked to) explcitily states that the fracking was not confined to the Clinton Sandstone, and that this occured because the green portion was insufficient.
     
    Trippy, Mar 5, 2012
    #41

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. adoucette

    adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Yes, Trippy I understand that and it's what I've been saying, the CEMENTING job was insufficient.

    They don't know the path for the gas to the well bore however, and NEVER state that they fracked the Newberg Dolamite as you assert.

    They most likely cause was simply that the concrete failed to hold because there wasn't enough of it.

    It's NOT about Fracking, it's about doing a well cement job properly.
     
    adoucette, Mar 5, 2012
    #42

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    What part about this part:
    "The abnormal circulation that was observed during the stimulation of the English No.1 well indicates that the frac communicated directly with the well bore and was not confined within the “Clinton” reservoir."
    Is unclear to you?

    If the Frac was not confined to the Clinton Resevoir, and was not in the Newburg Limestone, then where was it that it was able to communicate directly with the well bore?
     
    Trippy, Mar 5, 2012
    #43

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. adoucette

    adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Not one word is unclear.

    You are misinterpreting what it is saying.

    The FRAC they are discussing is the fluid used for Fracking.

    It communicated directly with the well bore through the damn bad cement job which wasn't deep enough to hold the pressure.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2012
    adoucette, Mar 5, 2012
    #44
  8. billvon

    billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,646
    Then what she said was literally correct. At that time she was either not aware of, or could plausibly deny, the findings of the Pavilion study. Now that it exists, presumably she'd admit that there were problems discovered. (Or if she were a savvy enough politician she could say something like "I am not aware of any serious problems caused by fracking" or something like that, so she can later define "serious".)
     
    billvon, Mar 5, 2012
    #45
  9. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    I disagree.

    The context of the sentence immediately before it:
    "When a well is properly constructed, the hydraulic fracture is confined between the permitted reservoir formation and the production casing."

    And immediately after it:
    "This communication could also have provided a conduit for “Clinton” gas to enter the annulus of the well."

    Suggests they are discussing the fractures, not the fracture fluid.
     
    Trippy, Mar 5, 2012
    #46
  10. adoucette

    adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Nope.

    The abnormal circulation they were discussing was the Frac fluid coming back up the well bore.

    After the fluid came up, the gas followed.
     
    adoucette, Mar 5, 2012
    #47
  11. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Which would be expected by everything I have said.

    Unless you can think of someway that the fractures caused by fracking fluid might appear in the well without the fracking fluid being there?
     
    Trippy, Mar 5, 2012
    #48
  12. adoucette

    adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Except communicating with the Well bore only means that they blew out the cement.

    (more likely just made channels in it)
     
    adoucette, Mar 5, 2012
    #49
  13. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Yeah, only the additional context provided by a subsequent sentence implies my mechanism over yours:

    Unless you have an alternative interpretation to the phrase "Out of zone hydraulic fracturing"?
     
    Trippy, Mar 5, 2012
    #50
  14. brucep

    brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    OSHA forced the oil industry to clean up a terrible act. OSHA and the oil industry did a pretty good job. Except for BP.

    http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bps-dismal-safety-record/story?id=10763042#.T1SCNRyD-68

    The investigative report for the BP Texas City Explosion. I worked in refinery operations for 30 years and this was hard to believe when I read the details.

    http://www.csb.gov/assets/document/CSBFinalReportBP.pdf
     
    brucep, Mar 5, 2012
    #51
  15. Captain Kremmen

    Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    It's an old article.
    How has BP behaved since they have been given punitive fines instead of a few hundred million, which to them is pocket change?

    The Gulf of Mexico foul up is likely to cost them over $40 Billion.
    They don't like that.
    It won't happen again.
    We need these people because we need energy,
    but they ain't to be trusted.
     
    Captain Kremmen, Mar 5, 2012
    #52
  16. brucep

    brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    The point is BP needs to fix their business model and quit killing people. Hopefully the 40 billion will change their culture. Not so far according to OSHA. They suck. So until they change their culture we can 'definitely do without' BP blowing up our refineries and spilling crude into our Gulf.
     
    brucep, Mar 5, 2012
    #53
  17. adoucette

    adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Yes, past the area where the cement was placed.
     
    adoucette, Mar 5, 2012
    #54
  18. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    And the cement did not seal the Newburg Dolomite, even though it was supposed to.

    Which leads us back to my contention - that they fracked in the wrong place, something you have consistently denied happened, and that that wrong place was (or included) the Newburg Dolomite.
     
    Trippy, Mar 5, 2012
    #55
  19. adoucette

    adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    No, the cement is used to seal the well bore.

    The cement isn't as hard as rock and so they need a lot of it to hold the pressure.

    They didn't have enough and blew through it.
     
    adoucette, Mar 5, 2012
    #56
  20. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    AND it was supposed to seal the Newburg Dolomite.

    As I have quoted for you, several times now, the cement was supposed to extend 700-800 feet above the level of the Clinton, and part of the reason for this was to isolate the well from the Newburg Dolomite.
     
    Trippy, Mar 5, 2012
    #57
  21. adoucette

    adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Yes, the cement was supposed to seal of the Newberg zone so it couldn't release gas up the bore hole.

    There wasn't enough cement to do so.

    Note the release of gas from the Newburg zone had nothing to do with Fracking.

    The cement job was supposed to seal it off.

    It didn't.

    The report does NOT state that the Fracking had any effect on the Newberg zone.
     
    adoucette, Mar 5, 2012
    #58
  22. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Right, so now we have that set right...

    That's not what the passage that you quote implies.

    The most that can be reasonably infered from that is that the Newburg Dolomite is capable of releasing gas without fracking. That does not imply that the fracking had nothing to do with the release of the gas, the source of the over-pressure, or that the Newburg Wasn't fracked.

    Even if you were able to prove that the Newburg Dolomite didn't participate in the out of zone fracking, which happened above the cement, the majority of my point is still proven. Improper, out of zone fracking, that was caused by improper construction resulted in the venting of deep high pressure natural gas directly into the well, which was allowed to build up in the well, resulting in the contamination of groundwater resources by the natural gas as it migrated through the natural porosity of the bedrock.

    My argument stands independent of whether or not the Newburg Dolomite was actually fracked.
     
    Trippy, Mar 5, 2012
    #59
  23. adoucette

    adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Exactly, and I've never contended anything except that it was a bad Cement Job.


    Why yes it does.

    Well then take it up with Lisa Jackson because this was a well known case, and 3 years after this event she completely disagreed with you that this was a issue with Fracking.

    "I’m not aware of any proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water"
     
    adoucette, Mar 6, 2012
    #60
Page 3 of 7

Share This Page