It’s not my birthday or Christmas or even close to Valentines’ Day but today I received a love letter from Monte Besler who works for a fracking company called FracN8r that operates in the Bakken Shale. As Upton Sinclair taught us, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.” So, this post is purely for your entertainment, Dear Readers.
Monte Besler – December 3, 2011 at 11:24 am [edit]
Better pull up you pants, you bias is showing. First of all, you totally mischaracterised my quote in the article with a pure lie. You know as well as I that I said I only recognized three of the chemicals as used in fracturing, not that I only recognized three of the chemicals. Then in true form you followed your lie about me with an insult to my character and intelligence.
Your pants seem to be all up in a wad, Monte. Is this what’s got you down? If so, you just made things a whole lot worse.
Oh, sorry. Here is what you said: “Monte Besler, a fracking consultant with the company FracN8tr, said he recognizes three chemicals from the analysis as sometimes used in frack fluids.” I guess we will just have to take your word for that, Monte, because I haven’t found where FracN8r discloses the chemicals used when you frack. But I did find where you admit to using diesel.
Monte Besler, a fracture treatment consultant with a company called FracN8r, said many companies have already eliminated diesel and use mineral or vegetable oil as the gelling agent that helps suspend sand particles in the injection fluid.
Diesel or some distillate gets used only when it’s very cold and other oils would freeze or when there’s no available alternative.
“If you didn’t have cold in North Dakota, probably no one would use diesel,” Besler said.
So, cold means it’s cool to use diesel, Monte? I guess a good slug of diesel in drinking water can help warm up those cold North Dakota nights, eh? But just a teeny bit of diesel, which contains benzene, can contaminate a bunch of water. Sometimes MTBE gets added into diesel. The Ruggieros didn’t have any MTBE in their baseline water test. After fracking they have MTBE. OOPS!
A quick review of those chemicals listed in the video would show that considering how long some have been in existance, some for around 100 years, before hydraulic fracturing started back in the 1940′s, the most common uses of most of them, and yes, even the natural sources for many of them, that not finding them in an air sample would be the anomally. To believe that those chemicals are the result of fracturing exposes your bias, lack of knowledge of the subject of fracturing chemicals, and cowardice in taking a cheap shot at me in your blog.
That’s what you guys always say—“I didn’t do it”—and you get away with it because there is no national baseline testing being conducted. But, we do have some individual baseline tests and these kinds of chemicals were not in any air samples until after fracking. Maybe you missed this: News Flash to Helms: If it’s not in the formation, it was added by someone, somewhere in the production process. I’m standing by that. The anomaly would be finding that many chemicals, some at very high concentrations, on a farm in the middle of nowhere unless there was heavy industry near.
Furthermore, the video you tout as proof of something related to fracturing, would be laughed out of court and the scientific world for lack of pertinent data like concentrations, corroborating tests from other laboratories, proof of sources, vet results for cause of death, etc. It is nothing but pure propoganda. Even my 8 year old granddaugher can do a better job of faking a crying fit than the pathetic effort in the video.
I did not “tout” the video as proof of anything. I tout the air testing as rock solid proof. Stay tuned for vet results because those do exist. Results from water testing also exist and there are some known fracking chemicals in the water. OOPS! Guess you fracked up FracN8r!
Nice that you make fun of a woman who, along with her husband, is undergoing treatment for vocal cord dysfunction. If you click on the links you will see that some of the chemicals affect the throat and vocal cords and cause respiratory distress.
Having grown up on a farm with a huge population of farm cats and kittens, I would almost bet a steak dinner the kittens are suffering from feline dystemper. I saw the same behavior many times and it is usually fatal as well and has nothing to do with hydraulic fracturing.
You should take better care of your animals. Having worked for a vet for several years, AND having grown up on a farm, I would bet you a vegetarian dinner (I’m not about to eat any Texas or North Dakota beef laced with fracking chemicals) that feline distemper NEVER makes cattle get the wobbles. Besides, ALL the animals on this farm are under the care of a veterinarian who has done autopsies and can find no physical reason for the illness. But, hey, I’ll just let the farm owner speak here:
“a bad day for an email like this, I just held my yorkie as he died of bronchitis, I have 2 more dogs sick with this from this [fracking] air we are forced to breathe. You may want to remind this jackass that my husband and I stood in his support several years ago at the [name of function removed] here in [name of town removed] when his son was killed, many thanks to him for the comments made about my fake efforts. Too many people here value money over life and no value on the health of the community. I have thousands of vet bills, and yes I have tested for distemper and other cat disease. Just had a kitten in the vet this week with my dogs, the vet has put them on stronger antibiotics, no response, I had to go to the pharmacy yesterday and get people antibiotics. There is nothing I won’t do to try to save an animal, this is my family.”
My sincere condolences to you, Monte, over the loss of your child. Sometimes that kind of life event helps people have more compassions and sometimes it makes them bitter. I hope you find some peace.
By the way, the only people who call it fracking with a “K” are those uninformed individuals outside the industry. Within the industry, it is hydraulic fracturing to the informed. We consider “fracking” a slang word used by idiots. Also, hydraulic fracturing is not a drilling process either. It is part of the completion performed after drilling is completed and the rig is gone, but that seldom stops the uninformed from showing their ignornance of the subject they try to claim knowledge about.
Really? See, this is exactly why we can’t trust you guys with our water—you can’t even follow a few simple grammar rules. Please see: Who put the “k” in fracking? The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the fracking truth.
So, are you a consultant for FracN8r, a frack-ing company? Or, are you a consultant for FracN8r a fray-sing company? Right now you get to make up your own rules about fracking but you don’t get to make up your own rules about grammar. BTW, spell check is your friend. IJS. I have an issue with spelling also so no judgment there, but I do try to find the correct spelling if I see the word is underlined in red.
I know you like to take the very narrow view of fracking but like it or not it is part of the overall process of shale oil and gas extraction. You don’t get to be like a teenager and say: She wasn’t pregnant when I got out of the backseat so I can’t be responsible.
I’m also betting you don’t have the courage to post this comment either. Since you insulted my knowledge of hydraulic fracturing, I would be happy to go toe to toe with you on your knowledge of the technology or lack thereof.
Care to put your money where your mouth is? If you knew me better, you would have known that I always post love letters from Gasholes. I only made the Hate Mail category recently so that link doesn’t catch all of them.
On the toe-to-toe challenge: yeah, go ahead and bring that.
About Sharon Wilson
Sharon Wilson is considered a leading citizen expert on the impacts of shale oil and gas extraction. She is the go-to person whether it’s top EPA officials from D.C., national and international news networks, or residents facing the shock of eminent domain and the devastating environmental effects of natural gas development in their backyards.
- Web |
- More Posts(5121)
Fracking dude up north is a typical Big Gas Mafia mouthpiece–if his lips are moving he’s lieing! Also this dude is big on the minor technicalities–since he’s so precise, have him precisely disclose all the fracking chemicals used for just one (as a starter) producing well up north–which had a successful frack job.
Well like dude, it is like I can’t disclose the chemicals, like cause I might, like get fired man. The client, like the man with the dough, gets like really warped if I like tell stuff like that, like without the big dude man’s OK. It’s like what they make us working stiffs with jobs, you know what that is man, right, do to get the dough, and its like a contract or something, and to be like honest and have major integrity, we must do as the paper we signed like says, man.
I can understand why the man with the dough would get upset if you revealed his secret fracking formula. Then we could sue his a$$ when we proved those weird chemicals in our drinking water–that never occur naturally in water–were from his fracking around.
Or perhaps its because each company has its own formula for which works best… are you going to sue Kentucky Fried Chicken because it won’t release its ingredients list? I mean I know you swear they left something in the groundwater and thats how you got fat… wow, I am dumber for reading this blog.
Really? You’re going to use the KFC argument? I’m blown away by that logic. Thanks
He’s trying to use that military psyops on you. haha
If this is military psyop, he needs to go back and take the course over.
He’s really good at it. It’s totally working.
You give me far to much credit, but keep the tin foil cap on your head just in case i’m deep cover for some ultra-secret petroleum cartel beaming evil thoughts into your brain.
Maybe you aren’t aware of the history behind that comment.
Your industry uses military PSYOP personnel to infiltrate our neighborhoods and they use the US Army/Marine Insurgency Manual on us. Since you claim to be a fan of “critical thinking” try to think critically about that one. If your industry weren’t causing great harm to people, why would such EXTREME measures be required. Most people like to be cool in the summer and warm in the winter, like the flame to come on the burner, like hot water. But when those things come at the expense of our health, safe drinking water and clean air, it puts a different perspective on things.
We should all be cognisant of where our energy comes from and what effects it has or could have on our life.
That includes all sources of energy including renewables like ethanol, for instance. We hear a lot about the environmental consequences of a crude oil tanker spill or oil pipeline lea during transportation.
One of the useful properties of liquid hydrocarbons is the ease by which they can be transported from source to user.
At first glance, it would seem that the green darling ethanol would have those same advantages. What would happen if a tanker or pipeline transporting ethanol were to have a spill or leak. Oil and water don’t readily mix and a significant port can be recovered from water for instance. Try separating ethanol from water in a pond, ocean, or aquifer. Ethanol is infinitely soluble in water. It is also toxic to most life forms.
If that isn’t enough, check into how much carbon dioxide is produced making ethanol, or the energy balance of hydrocarbons needed to make a gallon of ethanol today. So much for reducing dependency on hydrocarbon imports with the later, as it takes about 1.5 gallons of fossil hydrocarbon energy equivalent to make a gallon of ethanol.
Things are not always what they seem.
Ethanol? Really? Nobody is talking about ethanol anymore, Monte. Try to keep up.
Also, people have given up on you so I don’t think anyone will see your tardy replies. If you want to stay in the game you have to do what we do: NEVER SLEEP.
Spelling lesson number one. It is FRACN8R without the “T”, and I am a consultant. and I own that company. I do not own a hydraulic fracturing company or an oil well. I design and supervise hydraulic fracturing operations.
I am curious why, if the air is so toxic around fracturing operations, that the employees who do this for a living, or are around it on a daily basis ,are not dropping like flies? I myself have been associated with hydraulic fracturing for over 30 years, and as best I can tell, not suffering any acute effects similar to those attributed to the cats, dogs, and cattle over a very short time frame of at the most, very indirect exposure. I also know hundreds of individuals who have worked in the hydraulic fracturing service for decades without either acute or chronic problems. We should be extinct given the hyperbole expressed by some.
Now, if you go over the list of chemicals shown in the video, a number of them are known to cause acute neurological effects, but they are not used in fracturing.
Chemicals that are instead used as cleaning solvents, paint thinners, dry cleaning, refrigerants for air conditioners and refrigerators, etc., all likely to be found around the home and farm. Also, among those listed were fumigants and chemical compnents in agricultural chemicals. Fumigants used to treat grains and other farm products. I would be looking much closer to home for the culprit.
Also, among the chemicals were some naturally occurring products that are found in the atmosphere over the entire planet. Not finding them would have raised the suspician of a fabricated sample, so it is good they are present.
An example would be methane. Yes, it is found in natural gas, but that is because it is natural. Cows, being a ruminant produce prodigous amounts of the gas and have even been targeted by some extremists for a GHG tax. Rotting cow manure is also a souce of methane, as is an active compost pile. Virtually any pile of rotting organic material will generate methane. I wonder how unusualt it is to find methane on a farm place?
D-Limonene was the most humorous of the results. It is extracted from citrus peelings and is used in supposedly green cleaning agents and to add than lemony fragrance to many products. Not surprising it was found in the house. Oh yes, and finding the aromatics, dimethyl and trimethyl disulfide, largely responsible for much of the flavor and aroma in onions and garlic in a house or on a farm would be unusual?
A couple of the compounds are expelled into the atmosphere by trees and plants. One, propene as I recall, being largely responsible for the smog like blue haze that forms over forests when it reacts with sunlight. Methyl chloride, another more common name for the chloromethane on the list is the most prevalent halogenated hydrocarbon present in the atmosphere and has both man and natural sources, the latter occurring when sunlight reacts with organic material in sea foam. It is found throughout the atmosphere due to its prevalence.
Below is a brief synopsis of the chemicals.
1,1,2,2-Tetrachlroethane = Common solvent and refrigerant R-130.
Propene = Produced by refining petroleum and during natural gas processing. Also produced naturally by plants and trees.
Tetrachloroethene = Common dry cleaning solvent and auto part cleaning solvent due to excellent degreasing ability.
Tetrahydrofuran = Solvent for PVC and varnish.
Toluene = Common solvent, paint thinner, and minor component in crude oil.
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene = Solvent for fullerene, a complex carbon molecule. Use to clean carbon residue off metal parts.
Acetone = Solvent in nail polish remover. Produced by the human body naturally.
Carbon disulfide = Insecticide and fumigant for grain, etc.
Chloromethane (methyl chloride) = Refrigerant R-40. Produced abundantly in nature. Most abundant organo-halogen found in atmosphere.
1,2-Dichlorobenzene = Metal cleaning solvent. Used in making agro-chemicals and as an insecticide.
Methyl Ethyl Ketone = Common solvent. Produced by some trees.
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone = Solvent. Used to denature alcohol.
Dimethyl disulfide = Food additive in several food flavors.
Dimethyl trisulfide = Food aroma component associated with garlic and onions.
D-limonene = Aromatic solvent derived from the rind of lemons and other citrus fruits.
Methane = Common in crude oil and natural gas, but also produced by ruminants (cows), rotting organic material, methanogenic bacteria, etc.
Your list of MSDS sheets is impressive. As you probably know, there is even an MSDS sheet for water that looks scary at first pass. All the response, health, fire, cleanup data, etc., in and MSDS sheet is based on the raw material out of the drum, not in the extremely diluted concentrations used in hydraulic fracturing.
The most egregious error in your blog statements is the assumption fracturing fluids and the included chemicals are injected into the freshwater aquifers directly as a practice and in abundance. This is most certainly not the common practice or intention. It takes the failure of several levels of protection for this to occur, involving several steel casings, cement isolation sheaths, and pumping over-pressure controls, and even then fluids my not contact or enter a frewhwater aquifer. Generally, huge volumes of fluid would have to be injected to reach a well located just a few hundred feet away, and this would very rarely occur before the problem was detected. Most leaks would be detected within seconds and measures taken to limit injected volume.
First of all, these fluids are expensive, and pumping them is expensive, so keeping fluids confined to the intervals where they are intended is important to the companies involved. The average Bakken fracturing treatment costs between $3 million and $5 million.
Also, fracturing into an aquifer would likely result in excessive water production, again not something desirable. There are entire technologies dedicated to preventing the production of water.
My apologies, Monte Besler, on misspelling the name of your fine company, FracN8r. I just did a copy and paste from HERE.
Wow, Monte Besler, you are really good. It’s almost like I haven’t heard that same, lame bull$hit thousands of times. Thanks for making me feel like you were the first even though you aren’t.
Just a few weeks ago, at the Big
Gashole(sorry) Gas Mafia PR Conference, One of the speakers said:Tell them:
* biocides are bleach
* poly (something) is chap stick – take your chap stick with you to show them
* Surfectants are Dove soap
Drilling mud is next. Tell them it’s clear water
Urban development is where we’re headed
That’s a Gashole being transparent. SO clever! Chapstick!
So, Monte Besler, let’s see you being transparent. What’s in the frack fluid? …complete chemical breakdown with percentages. And, while you’re at it, what is your proppant and how much water do you use?
Like I said earlier, Monte Besler, the number and, in some cases the levels, of chemicals detected is an anomaly. If a few of those chemicals were detected at very low, normal levels, then we wouldn’t be having this conversation, now. Would we?
See, this is a pattern all over the US. Drillers move in and start fracking, the amount of chemicals in air, water and soil increases, people and animals get sick. How long do you think you can get away with that? I mean, really?
As for the workers getting sick, there is ample documentation showing that oil field workers are at a much higher risk of cancer. Why, just last month, a young woman contacted me with the sad news that her 38-year-old husband had just died from brain cancer and lymphoma. He tested the fracking fluid and flowback.
Of course that’s an anecdote…just like the anecdote that fracking has never contaminated any water. No, wait a minute! That one is a lie.
Be careful out there, Monte Besler, you are at risk.
YOU GO MONTE!! GET READY FOR THE INSULTS AND LOW-BLOWS FROM NAZI-LADY!
Monte, ole buddy–you are so full of BS. I’ll bet you even put beans in your chili.
PS: bet methane is not a fracking fluid when you pump it down that well—-ha, ha.
Seriously dude, you obviously are totally clueless. Do you even know what methane is? It is a alkane hydrocarbon gas that boils at -258F. Even in North Dakota that is damn cold. Why on Earth would we pump methane into gas or oil wells? Methane is part of the natural gas produced from the wells for Pete’s sake. If this is the pinnacle of your knowledge of the subject, I suggest you hit the books.
You listed methane in your list of fracking chemicals above! Didn’t figure you knew what you were talking about. I’m still waiting for the recipe, including quantities.
Read it again and double check where I said those were used in fracturing? That move was on Sharon’s part and the ND individual who is attempting the same, and the list with details is part of my rebuttal.
I’m still waiting for that recipe, including quantities, including water, etc. I could care less where else on the planet the specific chemicals exist that you used on a specific well frac job. Just want the answer, stop packing sand up my behind!
Since you mentioned water, I wanted to talk about the amounts of water used on a large fracturing treatment and put it into perspective for you with something you might have seen. A large hydraulic fracturing treatment might use up to 4 million gallons of water over a period of a few days.
Have you seen the center pivot irrigation systems, i.e, large sprinkle irrigation systems that roll around a circular field with a central water source that acts as the pivot. These usually water on intervals and used enough water to equal a 1 to 2 inch rain each time to insure they water to the full depth of the plants roots. Let’s use a small example of a quarter section or a 160 acre field. Many of these systems cover an entire section or 640 acres.
In about one days time or less, the equivalent of two inches of rain or irrigation water in this case, pumped through the center pivot system, is over 8 million gallons of water on that 160 acre field. That is repeated on that same patch of land several times a season. Hydraulic fracturing is a pimple on an elephants behind in the world of big water users. Farmers rule that world.
When North Dakota oil and gas producers went to the state water commission to discuss our water use and see what was needed to insure complience with regulations, the water board almost laughed at them when they told them how much water they would need. Compared to other major users like irrigation, the oil and gas usage for fracturing was insignificant. The problem here is not supply but location and transportation.
You really aren’t doing that well here. I know you think you are but that’s because your ego is getting in the way of reality. We do a lot of research.
The water you use is permanently removed from the active hydrologic cycle. Unless it is recycled, which I seriously doubt since you operate in North Dakota, that water is no longer available for human, animal or agricultural use.
If you’re going to play with us, you need to bring your best game.
Actually, some operators in North Dakota using slickwater fracture treatments do reuse a portion of their recovered fracturing fluids. Others using the fracturing gel systems can’t reuse the very high salinity brines from the Bakken, recovered after the fracturing treatments, but do reuse them for drilling and completion fluids to reduce their total water use.
There is no such thing as a single fracturing fluid recipe. Fracturing fluids are specifically formulated for the rock type, whether oil or gas is present, clay minerals present, formation temperature, formation permiability, proppant transport, treatment conductor, pumping equipment, etc., etc., and these characteristics will even vary over the duration of the fracturing treatment. Proppants vary from job to job for similar reasons and even within a treatment as well.
I’LL BE BACK!
Just as soon as I read more in the “How to Deal with Fracking Insurgents Who Want to Know What’s in the Frack” chapter of the Big Gas Mafia Lie Book.
Before you get too carried away with that name, you might want to check what can happen if someone damages or discredits a tradename or uses it without permission. The monitor of this forum might want to check into that as well to make sure the forum or blog supplier doesn’t take offense to it as well.
The monitor of this forum does not like threats. One of the commenters here has an attorney brother who took a case such as you threaten all the way to the Supreme Court. Guess what the blogger had to give up?
N-O-T-H-I-N-G!
Now, I can tell that you are a proud guy, so I asked the commenter to play nice. But, I do not like getting threatened. I don’t really think this is somewhere you want to go anyway. You are NOT helping the case for fracking.
Monte,
Just tell us what’s in the FRACKing fluid. You’re not KFC. Trade secret my ass. It’s a secret because it would piss off millions of Americans knowing what’s in it and your industry would be in deep crap. Your industry wants to be transparent….show them the way. Use an alias if you need to. We won’t tell.
That dude seriously has the hots for you, Sharon. I think you should mail him some underwear.
He’s way too old for me.
I’m probably way older than any of you and it shows.
They have a new cure for dementia
Might be dementia. I know I have forgotten more about hydraulic fracturing than the entire lot here knows.
Here’s what we know about fracking: When you frack, our water gets contaminated.
This frack dude is just somekind of PR person–just full of BS.
Ok, if I am just a public relations guy and full of male bovine dung, then why don’t any of you challenge me on a single technical point. If I don’t know what I am talking about, you should be able to trip me up somehow.
On the other hand, if you are too scared to step up on the stage and debate technical points, then just accept you don’t have a clue yourself. So far, nobody has done more than call me a liar, etc., but are unwilling to provide a single technical point they can defend.
You are all just fluff and no real stuff if you are unwilling to defend your position with anything more than name calling and insults. If you are fracking insurgents, I know I can sleep sound tonight. Insurgents know their battlefield, and with your lack of knowledge of the subject of hydraulic fracturing, you guys aren’t even on it yet.
See up thread.
Oh. All right. Here goes…
It’s a whole lotta water, with just a llittle bit of chlorox, a sprinkle of dove soap and some chapstick. We also use playsand just like your kid has in his sandbox.
That’s it. I swear!
Okay. Wait just a minute. I’m going to go mix some up and drink it.
…
…
…
There. See, I’m fine. So now, will you enviro terrorists shut up?
Yeah, I wouldn’t use the name of his company. He’s really proud of that bit of creativity.
Smart move.
Mr. Besler,
We are a shale gas news organization with annual revenue of $0. Expenses are off the chart. It only took us a little over a year, inspired by 3 thumper trucks and one monster Chesapeake frac pond to have this phenomenal success. In light of that, just wondering about the name of your company.
Does the name, “FracN8r” have to do with revenge, destruction and science fiction? The movie that your company sounds like, “The Terminator” comes to mind. Is that your inspiration?? Thank you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Terminator
P.S.: We see that you aren’t doing that much better than we are. Maybe you should go public. We thought the frackers were raking it in, lately. In our area, the fracking really revs up this time of the year. Have a nice holiday.
http://www.manta.com/g/mr0hm7x/monte-besler
[…]
About:
Fracn8r Consulting, LLC in Williston, ND is a private company which is listed under consultants-business (unclassified). Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of $34,000 and employs a staff of 1.
[…]
Are you for real? The nickname is one given to me by workers and friends in the hydraulic fracturing industry. When I went to work for myself as a consultant in that industry, I just used it as my company name. The nickname relates to my experience and knowledge of hydraulic fracturing. No dark hidden meanings or anything mysterious like that.
In regard to my financial status, only a fool would put their prsonal income information on an internet blog or forum. Not sure where you good those numbers, but thank you. I’m doing fine.
Quick response to one of your items.
Bleach or sodium hypochlorite is sometimes uses as a biocide in hydraulic fracturing. It is very inexpensive and essentially equivalent to the chlorine used to kill microbes in municipal water treatment plants. Sometimes other sources for the chlorine ion are used in city water, like chloramine or sodium chlorate, but chlorine is the active component in each case. Bleach as a biocide is almost exclusively limited to what is commonly called a slickwater treatment where bacteria degradation of the polymers is not a big issue.
When using polysaccharides like guar gum, a common food thickener, or cellulose derivatives from wood processing, which are long chain polymers of simple sugar molecules in both cases and very good bacteria food, more persistant biocides are used like the glutaraldahyde types. These biocides are commonly used in the medical industry to clean items that cannot be heat sterilized.
For high pH systems, the biocide of choice for the previously mentioned polysaccharide based polymers is a bromine releasing agent similar to the products used to treat jacuzzi tubs, in place of bleach, to eliminate the pungent odor of chlorine. Yes, I mean like the bromine treatment for the jacuzzi that you can bath in.
I can’t be sure of the polymer the speaker was referring to, but I suspect it is some type of polyacrylamide. They are the most common fluid friction reducing agents added to the fracturing fluid to reduce the pressure needed to pump the fluid down the pipe to the formation. Polyacrylamides have a huge affinity for moisture and may be a component in chapstick. If not, another common use for at least one type of polyacrylamide is the moisture retaining crystals used in potted plants. Certainly, not all polyacrylamides would be useful as chapstick, but as a group are largely innocuous and readily biodegradable into carbon dioxide, water, and nitorgen compounds.
In most cases, Dove soap or any other dishwashing detergnet would not work in an oil well, but might in some gas wells, although I am fairly certain it is not used. However, Dove soap and all detergents generally used to remove grease from dishes are surfactants. They are composed of a rod shaped molecule containing both a water and oil soluble end. The oil soluble end is attacted to oil droplets and the water soluble end to water. When they contact the interface between the two fluids they interfere with the surface tension force and either increase or decrease the foaming or emulsifying characteristic of the water containing them. There are a multitude of different surfactants with different functions. In gas wells, the purpose is to make the water wetter to aid in recovery of the water from the pore spaces in the rock after the fracturing treatment. Most formations contain too much soluble calcium, magnesium, or iron or are too hot to allow the use of Dove detergent, but some surfactants with similar chemistry that are resistant to precipitation by calcium and magnesium are used. In formations that are too hot, surfactants like Dove soap would precipitate from solution by a mechanism called clouding and not function as intended.
There are three main proppants used in hydraulic fracturing. The most common by far is plain old quartz sand just like in your childs sandbox only even cleaner.
Sometimes the sand grains are coated with resins, read epoxy or furan plastics, to encapulate them for better longterm performance in the formation The epoxy resins are much like the epoxy glue you mix up with two components. The resins re mostly or entirely set before the sand is pumped.
Ceramics are made from mixtures of clay and aluminum oxide (corundum) with differing ratios to control the mechanical strength of the material. The materials are fused together at high temperatures and the higher the corundum fraction the stronger the proppant. You might know the red variety of naturally occuring corundum as ruby and the blue as sapphire. The fused clay becomes largely a variety of silicon dioxide known as cristobalite. Another common use for pure corundum is in the black grinding wheels used in a machine shop to grind steel.
You forgot a couple of items.
CHEMICALS USED IN HYDRAULIC FRACTURING
Oh, and the diesel fuel. You failed to mention the previously noted diesel fuel use by your company.
I’ve got to hand it to you. I’m TOTALLY convinced now.
Monte,
Don’t bother trying to argue with Sharon. Like most fractivists, facts, reason, context, perspective, and reality are lost on her. You will save yourself much frustration by foregoing any attempts to engage her on a rational level and just ignoring her, like the rest of us blessed with critical thinking skills have chosen to do. Best of luck in your endeavors.
Mike Knapp
President
Knapp Acquisitions & Production
I know, MIke. I just can’t get critically think past the reality of emissions that make me break out in blisters and water that has drilling mud floating in it. Narrow minded of me, eh?
There’s just one thing, Mike. Every time you drill a well, you create more people just like me. What to do about us…?
That’s right. Keep discounting us Mike.
Mike,
Thanks for the advice. Worst thing about it is I probably will continue for a while. My wife would tell you it is in my blood. Those willing to debate with me eventually come to understand that arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling a pig. After a while they come to realize the pig loves the mud.
Best regards to you as well.
Monte Besler
President
FRACN8R Consulting LLC
That’s so sweet; I’m moved by how you’ve reached out to Monte, advising him to ignore Sharon by posting on her blog. I guess some folks ignore her by, um, reading her blog and commenting on it.
It’s funny how the fact that gas transmission pipelines have setbacks from homes, & other inhabited areas, in many places is noted, yet gas gathering pipelines are being placed point blank to homes. But, gas gathering pipelines have the same kill zone if they explode & burn as a gas transmission pipeline of the same size & pressure.
Not really. Most gas gathering systems operate at low pressure, often under 50 psi, while gas transmission lines are almost always high pressure. Big difference in design and in rate of gas discharge in the event it were to leak. Not sure where you are talking about, but that is certainly not the case here in North Dakota. Set back from inhabited areas for new drilling sites has been about 400 yards or more for several years now.
There’s no regulation to prohibit higher pressures in gas gathereing lines–frequently up to 1000 psi. Also gathering lines contain the untreated raw natural gas which includes H2S, water BTEX compounds etc., many which corrode the gas gathering lines before treating at gas plants. Also, these gathereing lines may include all kinds of very toxic corrosion inhibitors. By and large, the gathering lines are more dangerous than transmission lines!
Thanks for bringing up the H2S gas topic. Monte knows a bit about H2S gas.
He developed “a new acid system for use in sour wells;”
http://www.hohneng.com/companyinfo/keypersonnel.htm
Gee thanks. We love those sour wells right next to our homes.
Ms. Kitko,
While I don’t agree with much you have to say, I comment you for having the courage to identify yourself with your real name and courtesy to speak to others within the bounds of civil and respectful speach. However, you really need to find better company if you want your story to be heard and believed. All I have seen so far is name calling reminiscent of the actions of highschoolers. The use of obviously derogatory, disrepectful, and childishly crude names like GasHole and the use of Fracking as an adjective does nothing to further your group’s message. If people want respect, they have to show respect, and behave in a respectful manner. That does not mean you have to agree. That includes staying on message and discussing the facts in the message, not attacking the messenger.
As a hydraulic fracturing consultant, part of my job is to insure my clients have properly designed their wells to prevent the possibility of contaminating freshwater, and that they have met all the regulatory requirements meant to do the same. We are not so far apart as you might think.
Well, well, well…when the bully finds the group won’t tolerate his antics, he reaches out to someone in the group in an attempt to get someone in the group to side with him. Good luck with that.
I taught high school computer classes for a short while. Many of the teachers would complain to the principal demanding he force the students to give them respect. That was as laughable as what you have written above. I never had to go to the principle and beg for that because I showed respect to each student FIRST, right up front. And it wasn’t fake. I decided that every student was worthy of my respect. Then I didn’t have to whine to the principal about lack of respect. You have approached this all wrong to now talk about behaving in a respectful manner.
I have conversations with people in the industry all the time. They start off with a willingness to admit problems and a desire to find solutions. Those conversations don’t get very far if one party starts off with condescension. Go back and read your first comment on my blog.
I used to work in the oil and gas industry so I know this industry from inside out. I still have friends who work for industry and I sometimes make new friends who work for industry.
Now, you could have come on here and said, “Hey, I’m a fracker, things in that video look pretty bad. Tell me how it is you think fracking could be causing her problems.” That might have produced a completely different outcome. But you didn’t approach the matter in that way. Did you? You have been a poor ambassador for your industry.
Most of the people who have commented here have been harmed in one way or the other by your industry. They have had their land taken, their environment polluted, their serenity shattered, their health damaged, their water contaminated with known fracking chemicals and their property value diminished. Some are involved in lawsuits with your industry. Some, like me, have received death threats and threats to harm their loved ones. THEY CAN’T USE THEIR REAL NAMES. So, go ahead and feel superior because you put your name to your boorish comments.
That’s the to divide and conquer.
Don’t forget 18 years with Halliburton. That’s always a great résumé builder. (Just staying on message.)
http://www.hohneng.com/companyinfo/keypersonnel.htm
Oh, and when you speak of “respect,” you may be surprised to learn that “respect” is something the shale gas drillers only provide to those who don’t question their actions. When we do, they don’t like it. Then they don’t do “respect” at all.
message is for Monte. Link provided by A Nonny Mouse. thank you.
To fracking Monte–I really like some of your logic–along the lines of “It is healthy to drink human piss, since it’s already in your body all the time. I might have been born at night, but it wasn’t last night.
Keep up the good work TxSharon
Best comment EVER!
I love that analogy.
Well, well, well. I see that our friend Monte is very determined to convince us that he, alone, is intelligent and honest. The rest of us are ignorant at best, dishonest at worst. Interesting-he went to great lengths to attempt to shame Sharon by insulting her (“pull up your pants”–what the hell is that, Mr. Professional?). I’ve heard his spew before from people who have a lot of money to lose if anyone questions fracking. This is a guy who likes to poke fun at someone’s suffering (remember: his 8 year-old grandkid can cry better than a woman being gassed to death, etc.). So, my wishes this holiday season: I hope, in addition to his remarkable and rare intelligence, he is also gifted with a heart. Seems like his fell out somewhere. And a nice stocking stuffer: A conscience.
Prove she is suffering as the result of hydraulic fracturing, based on the evidence, rather than the feelings. Based on the results of the air test, it looks to me like she and her family might want to take a closer look at where they live for the poison. Nearly every one of those chemicals is used for something that might be found in a house or around a farm and almost none are used in hydraulic fracturing. Many would be found in an air sample taken anywhere in the world, and others would be found in most homes. The most polluted air in the world is in a house, but I think you guys know that. Some are so harmless that it is rediculous they are listed, like d-limonene and the aromatics that produce the aroma of onions and garlic, but they have scary chemical names, hence they are on the list.
Here’s what we know about the family and the animals in the video:
You can keep running but eventually there will be nowhere left to hide. Those of us who live in the gas patch know this FACT: When you drill and frack, our water, air and soil gets contaminated and our animals and children get sick.
You can either keep throwing out a bunch of curve balls and see how far that gets you–no one here is falling for you bull, btw. Or you can face the FACT that as Rex Tillerson (you know who that is, right?) said fracking has risks and get busy solving the problem.
Blowing smoke up our asses is not solving the problems and it’s wasting your time and ours.
First they ingnore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. – Ghandi
Monte Logic: Radiation is naturally occuring, so it’s ok to be at ground zero during a nuclear detonation.
That would be a useful comparison if we were debating the safety of the naturally occurring compounds when used in fracturing. However, that isn’t the point. The point is that those natural compounds are always present in nature and to automatically blame their presence on hydraulic fracturing is a red herring.
Pathetic, disingenuous reply that insults our intelligence. Don’t you have anything besides the same, lame industry bull?
Notice how Monte laces just a tiny bit of truth here and there in his statements. The rest is utter bull.
The only thing that is naturally occuring is the reverberations of your mouth. I recall a funny scene from “The Pricess Bride,” in which the Cecilian touts his knowledge and wisdom in a game of wits against what he believes is an inferior foe. The Cecilian must choose between 2 cups, one with poison, one without. After several minutes beating his chest about his intellect, he distracts is foe and switches the cups. He hails, “You’ve fallen to one of the classic blunders, the first of which is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less known is this, never go against a Cecilian when death is on the line, ha ha ha. [kills over]. Both of the cups were poisoned and his foe had spent the last couple of years building up an immunity to the poison. You are the Cecilian and Sharon is your foe. Trust me when I tell you, there isn’t one insult, threat, or action you can take to deter her. She has spent the last several years building up an immunity to people like you. More people listen to her than will ever listen to you, because she has nothing to gain, and you do, and it eats you alive and every time you post you are validating her influence and your fustration.
I love that movie! Thanks for that beautiful comparison. When I first started doing this guys like Monte would make me cry. Now guys like him make my day. I have built up immunity.
After calling me an idiot in his first comment HERE and making fun of a woman who has vocal cord dysfunction and multiple other ailments and whose animals are sick and dying, he pretends he has modeled civility here and feigns indignation because we fight back. It has happened with such regularity that I can almost predict it.
Gosh..
All I want to do is figure out how that 2-butoxyethanol got into my water…(surfactant)
How those cool things that look like contacts got in my water, when you hold a flame to it…(polyacryilics)
and most importantly, I want to know why my DR has told me not to go home;
‘if you are having visual disturbances on your way driving to your home, I can’t guaranty when the next time you go home, will be fatal”.
So where did that 2-BE come from that it is the pond, my kitchen faucet, the public water supply, the oily watered residue that shows up in culverts when we’re on a 10 year drought, the acid wash stain on my roof, the high levels of benzene, strontium, and methane…there’s no cows around me.
-Can you tell me where my 9 year old’s nose bleeds came from
-Where my vertigo comes from
-My sulfur allergy, where did that come from
-Where my emaciated body came from.
I know all the answers to all the above questions; it became an accumulative effect to BS and Chemicals used in fracking.
XOXO TxSharon
I also, find it rather amusing to hear the same thing over and over and over again…like it’s new news.
Faux Newz maybe.
Man! I wish they would get some new bullshit. This is the same stuff they’ve been saying for years. It’s not working. Hence the need for PSYOP and the insurgency manual.
Hi Sharon,
Unusual to find this sort of post on your blog. Of course it’s the same-old, same-old we’ve heard ad-nauseum, but it is revealing in terms of a particular kind of mentality common to many who are part of our system (corporatocracy/oligarchy). This mentality has been of interest to me for a year or so and has recently gained some media attention in the economic/finance/banking segment of the system.
It is time we all took a hard look at the “worm munching away” at the core of things. I urge everyone to read this recent article by Mitchell Anderson which appeared in The Tyee on Nov 21:
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/11/21/Corporate-Psychopaths/
I have collected many articles and research papers along these lines in the rapidly advancing field of Cognitive Science.
It’s vitally important to “know your enemy”. These “people” exist in every segment and at every level of the system. They are easily recognizable except to themselves.
Kris Kitco provided the key insights:
“I see that our friend Monte is very determined to convince us that he, alone, is intelligent and honest. The rest of us are ignorant at best, dishonest at worst. Interesting-he went to great lengths to attempt to shame Sharon by insulting her…”
“I hope, in addition to his remarkable and rare intelligence, he is also gifted with a heart. Seems like his fell out somewhere. And a nice stocking stuffer: A conscience.”
Here’s a basic, short & instructive video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgGyvxqYSbE&feature=watch_response
“Understanding them is the first step to defending against them.”
Please watch and then re-read all comments.
1% of the population – sound familiar?
Waking up is a process. Waking up is a path.
As always…Many Thanks Sharon
Thank you! I read the article about corporate psychopaths when it first came out. I think we need to remember to read that at least once a month.
That article came out just before I attended the Gashole PR Conference. It was helpful for me in that environment. Some of the people there were clearly psychopaths who were there to propagandize their own people–the mostly young PR professionals who attended the conference. The attempt to “inoculate” (their term) their own people will only work on a few. That is why there is such a huge turnover rate in oil and gas PR professionals. Chesapeake constantly runs ads for PR/Marketing people. Despite the fact that this industry pays way more than other industries, people with any empathy or conscience won’t last long. I know this so well. Way back in 1995, when I left the industry, I was making a whole lot more money than I am now. I am very happy now.
BTW, when I get hate mail or threats or invitations to be intimidated, I nearly always post it on my blog. I finally made “Hate Mail” and “Intimidation” categories. I think the best way to deal with these kinds of attacks is in the open. It has certainly reduced the amount of attacks on me. I guess Monte is a little slow on the uptake.
I’m watching the video and I will order that book. Thank you.
Re: “…these kinds of attacks…”
A month or so ago I watched an interview with one of the key organizers at Occupy Wall Street – young & way smart. He was asked about the numerous attacks on the protest and in every case he replied:
“It’s irrelevant.”
There is something new in the air besides fugitive emissions.
When exactly did I threaten you anyway? I challenged you to debate me in regard to your knowledge of hydraulic fracturing, but that doesn’t seem very threatening to me. I don’t recall it being a debate death match or anything like that, just plain old test of knowledge. As far as the bit about the monitor checking into someone using my tradename as a pseudonym, and I assume the monitor is you, that was meant as a friendly gesture to prevent you from getting crosswise with your forum or blog provider, if that was the case here, as they generally don’t like controversial things going on on their hosted sites that could involve lawsuits and the like.
Did I say, Monte Besler, threatened me? I don’t think I did. But you did kind of threaten a lawsuit and I’ve already explained about that so I didn’t FEEL threatened by you, in the least.
It seems our “friend” has delusions of being a cerebral psychopath. But he can’t quite get there.
I am alternately amused and horrified by the tone in this thread from the so-called fracking expert. At first it appeared that this was someone pretending to represent the industry, as the tone and content of his remarks quickly devolved into unprofessional, inarticulate name-calling. Apparently this very important and smart natural gas extraction consultant has plenty of free time to cruise blogs and attack critics. I don’t know any truly successful professionals who behave this way. It confirms that as we reach a tipping point on awareness of the need for change in drilling practices, the trolls are going to get louder and more obnoxious. Thanks, guys, for confirming we are making progress!
I come to your blog first thing most every morning. Still the best fractivist site out there IMHO – and it’s getting better. I guess I usually focus on the news oriented posts – for which I am very grateful. I don’t often have the time for comments (which ordinarily end up driving me nuts anyway).
Sorry to Kris for misspelling Kitko.
I have a question for Mr. Besler.
There is one thing about these compounds that interests me. It is this. Having access to air tests from all over the country done near shale gas operations, the compounds that show up are essentially the same whether the drilling and completing is going on in Texas or Pennsylvania or North Dakota or Wyoming or Colorado. Now it seems highly unlikely that these ompounds would show up in such disparate areas simply because they are common. Every time I see a new test, I know what I am going to see before I even look at it and I am rarely surprised. Could you address this please?
Finally, a civil question asking for an explanation. Thank you. You really answered you own question, but here goes. The reason you find those chemicals everywhere is that they are used nearly everywhere; have been used for decades and even some for over a century;, are used by multiple industries and by individuals; and the most important reason of all, they are volatile compounds. As volatile compounds they evaporate easily and quickly. Another reason for some is that they have natural sources that continuously regenerate the material. Methyl chloride or chloromethane , methane, and propene are examples of those that were on the list. Another reason you find these everywhere is that many are resistant to decomposition, especially the refrigerants that were on the list. If you recall a few years ago they outlawed the CFC’s, which were largely refrigerants because they entered the atmosphere, were persistant, and eventually reached the ozone layer, supposedly causing depletion. If CFC’s were able to diffuse throughout the world’s atmosphere, while only being used in large quantities in developed nations with refrigerators, air conditioners, etc., think how far products that had been in existance for much longer would be abe to spread. Samples taken inside homes are going to show many of the same gases because as a culture we use many of the same things from home to home that produce those gases. That is why I said earlier in this discussion that to not find many of these gases in a random air sample would be the exception, and it appears you have corroborated that statement.
Monte–am wondering who is on your current client llist as a consultant? You seem very skilled at preaching the “company line”–for O&G, of course. Am still waiting for that recipe of the fracking fluid/s.
PS: If you think it’s impossible to get that recipe, try to get a downhole sample, of oil or gas from any producing well. Have tried and got nothing. That is also “top secret”. Once we get that sample, then we can know what is in our air, water, and soil as a result of O&G production and use in local areas.
With all due respect, I haven’t corroborated anything Mr. Besler. Certainly one would expect to find certain compounds but, again, it is curious that the same compounds appear over and over again near drilling operations no matter where they occur in the U.S. Further, a number of tests have been done when wells are shut in to check the very veracity of your argument and those same compounds disappear entirely or drop quite dramatically. When you have seen such tests many times it becomes highly suggestive that the compounds have indeed come from drilling operations. If they were so common and occur naturally etc., they should still be there when the wells are not producing but that is NOT the case.
Baseline testing of air water and soil does not detect these chemicals. Followup testing does. Can you explain that?
Monte, I wonder about your comment about
1,1,2,2-Tetrachlroethane – Common solvent and refrigerant R-130
I assume you mean this is just commonly used in your industry as this is the info on it from the ATSDR-http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=800&tid=156. It is not used much in the US because it is so toxic -The general public is not expected to be exposed to significant amounts of 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane. It is not commonly found in drinking water, soil, or food. Why then would this be in an air sample taken miles away from a very small family owned dry cleaner? The only industry near sample is oil.
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane is not used in the oil and gas industry for fracturing, any more than it is used as a refrigerant or solvent in any other industry. Fracturing fluid does not require a refrigerant, and a solvent so volatile that it can be used as a refrigerant would be useless, as it would evaporate away before it could be used.
Furthermore, it is a chlorinated or halogenated hydrocarbon and oil and gas companies have ceased using that class of chemical for decades due to the effect it has on catalyst beds in oil refineries.
Oil buyers and pipeline companies test for their pesence in crude oil shipments and their presence would get the contaminated oil quarantined and the operator would only be able to get a fraction of the normal price for the crude oil as it would have limited refinery options.
As a consequence, chemicals used in fracturing would not have that component or any of the other halogenated hydrocarbons in their composition because they could diffuse into the produced oil and cause serious and expensive damage to refinery catalysts, and the loss off significant revenues from their customer’s produced oil. They wouldn’t be in business very long.
As far as why you would find that class of chemical in an air sample, the answer is simple. They are generally quite stable in the lower atmosphere, evaporate easily, and some are only rapidly decomposed by UV light when they reach the ozone layer about 10 miles up. Chemical stability and volatility are necessary properties of a refrigerant.
The halogenated hydrocarbons, which include CFC’s, which you may recall are implicated in damage to the ozone layer, have been manufactured for many decades. They have diffused throughout the atmosphere, obviously as high as 10 miles. The reality is that not finding them would be odd.
ND pipelines have BS&W monitors, trucks haul from many different locations, once the oil hits the pipeline they have no way of knowing what company it has come from, as it mixes together. Now we all know the mentality of truck drivers, they can barely unload the oil in the right place, often unload water into oil tanks, let alone do any technical sampling. So basically all the Bakken has limited buyers and is classified as contaminated oil? I have been told by other sources the only use for Bakken oil is to make diesel, it is useless in any other process. Not such a great find after all? Thus the need for a diesel refinery in Trenton? Massive amounts of diesel used to produce oil that produces diesel? Endless circle not much progress made here.
Bakken oil is suitable for producing a wide rage of hydrocarbon fuels and chemical precursers, but assuming your statement about uses for Bakken oil being only good for diesel was accurate, which it isn’t, then a 200 bbl transport of Bakken crude would roughly equal 8400 gallons of diesel. The typical diesel tractor gets about 5 mpg. Unless the well is in North Dakota and the pipeline loading station is 42,000 miles from the well, which is difficult, as the most distant point from anywhere on the Earth is only 12,500 miles away, then the truck is not going to use more diesel than the Bakken crude it carries would produce. To make it a breakeven we could take 420 trucks, driving 100 miles each, carrying 20 gallons of crude oil each I guess, but that would be silly wouldn’t it.
Of course, not all uses of diesel involve hauling diesel so that is not exactly realistic either. Let’s look at it another way, by EUR. The typical Bakken well is expected to produce from 150,000 bbl on the low end to over 750,000 bbl on the high end. Using the low end EUR value and assuming only half the crude oil could be made into diesel, that alone is enough diesel to make over 30 round trips to the moon and back in a typical tractor.
Enough with confusing facts though, gut feelings are always more valid right.
I don’t think any of us are very interested in going to the moon, Monte. We just want to live on our personal property without your fracking activities ruining our air, water, soil, quality of life and property values. And when they do ruin the above, we want to be adequately compensated so we can move our families to safety. In other words, be responsible for your messes.
You aren’t getting anywhere with us.
Mr Besler is shining a pencil flashlight in a room he has a stake in keeping dark.
Anyone can just reach out and turn on the light.
For reference here are links to Tony Ingraffea’s recent article and his broadcast debate with Don Siegel – CBC News:
“Does the natural gas industry need a new messenger?”
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/story/2011/11/28/nb-f-shale-gas-anthony-ingraffea-122.html
“Professors debate N.B.’s shale gas future”
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/story/2011/11/29/nb-siegel-ingraffea-shift-debate.html
Also, here’s a recent IR video of fugitive emmissions taken in PA by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-ybofaO9wI&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
There are hundreds of such videos – many on Sharon’s channel.
One last remark about “Prove It”:
There is a difference between the evidential criteria for proof in an individual case and such criteria for proof in a large (and growing) collection of cases.
A preponderance of circumstantial and anecdotal evidence is usually accepted both legally and scientifically. In every aspect of fracking (taken in it’s broadest sense) under discussion and debate, here and elsewhere, there exists an overwhelming (and growing) preponderance of circumstantial evidence of its harm to the environment in general and to public health in particular.
That is, unless you’re suffering from cognitive dissonance or holding a pencil flashlight.
Thanks for sharing Monte’s remarks, but I see nothing new in his (or her) remarks. Same old story about how the chemicals used in hydro-fracturing can be found under your kitchen sink. Perhaps they can be, but it isn’t necessarily the individual chemicals that concern most of us, although there are some very nasty ones on the list that the industry claims are “proprietary.”
To this I can only add that I have Lime Away and laundry bleach under my kitchen sink, but I would not suggest mixing those common household products in the bathroom….or anywhere else in the house!
You mean, you don’ t see yourself pouring them over rocks with water and drinking it?
Why not, it sounds perfectly safe to me (proprietary sarcasm)
How about when you mix a bunch of chemicals in a bowl and then heat it up and put your face in the bowl and a towel over your head to breath the fumes?
Who wouldn’t do that, it sounds safe to me (more proprietary sarcasm
🙂
Mr. Besler (Fracking Consultant and Designer) said this upthread:
“You are all just fluff and no real stuff if you are unwilling to defend your position with anything more than name calling and insults. If you are fracking insurgents, I know I can sleep sound tonight. Insurgents know their battlefield, and with your lack of knowledge of the subject of hydraulic fracturing, you guys aren’t even on it yet.”
I have no need to know everything that’s in the “How To Frack” Manual to know the battlefield, Mr. Besler. I have no doubt that you sleep well every night. You seem like a sound sleeper.
Saying that “insurgents know their battlefield” and that only insurgents who know “How to Frack” can be on the battlefield with you ~ is your definition of the battlefield. Not mine.
Sweet dreams. Just know that while you are sleeping, we aren’t.
From the information Mr. Besler has posted, it looks like he spends most of his time sleeping.
Mr. Besler, do you know of any drillers that drill a water well near their gas wells to monitor for contamination? If so, do they see contamination happening during drilling or during the hydraulic fracturing process?
Not as a standard practice, but I have heard of some considering it in certain test cases to show how well the current protections work to protect freshwater and also in some areas to document the presence of naturally occuring methane in freshwater aquifers, much more common than most people realize, prior to drilling or later during hydraulic fracturing. A third potential purpose is to document prior contamination from other industries or past oil and gas operations not related to the current drilling or hydraulic fracturing.
I guess our questions got too hard for Monte.
Not really, just busy at work again.
And making another fracking million.
Million what?
Sick. Rich. Disgusted. You name it. You said you were doing “fine” upthread.
“In regard to my financial status…I’m doing fine.”
Monte could you explain the coupling method you use for the pipe in the ground. I have a special interest in the 90 you make for the horizontal bore. I work in an industry that actually bores in the ground and uses cement encased pipe. So im curious about your couplers. Im also interested in how much frac material you recover and how the waste is disposed of. In my industry a mix of oil and water has to be drummed up and disposed of as hazardous waste. How do you seperate your waste material?
Monte has tucked his tail and run away.
It isn’t a 90 degree corner. In the Bakken and most unconventional resource plays, the pipe is curved over about a 700 to 1000 foot radius from vertical to horizontal.
Drill pipe uses a number of different type of threads, but all are typically a coarse tapered thread with face seal that is torqued to specification to provide a seal and allow the pipe to maintain seal while bent around the curve and rotating. However, much of the time the pipe is not rotating in the curve and drilling mud is used to drive a downhole motor and rotate the drill bit.
Once the well is drilled, the casing is run and that pipe can have a number of different thread types as well, depending on requirements. Common threads include 8 round and butrress wedge threads, but a number of special threads are common as well, especially with more extreme conditions.
Fracturing fluid volumes recovered varies considerably from formation to formation with some as low as a few percent to others approaching 70 to 80%.
Crude oil is separated from the recovered fracturing fluids and formation brine using the standard production fluid seperators and heater treaters used for oil and gas production.
The water phase, usually a variable mixture of fracturing fluid and formation brine is seperated from the oil and gas, stored on location in production tanks, and ultimately hauled to Class 2 saltwater disposal facilities and injected into regulated underground disposal formations, as per state regulations.
My favorite separator: Carbon Disulphide.
They use a lot of that in the Gas Patch to Separate Hydrogen Sulfide from the gas.
My reading at the house was 6 x the TCEQ long term exposure levels.
What exactly does that have to do specifically with hydraulic fracturing? Hydrogen sulfide is not caused by fracturing, but is either naturally present in the formation or the result of sulfide reducing bacteria acting on sulfates in water. What you are describing in regard to hydrogen sulfide treatment is a gas processing operation at surface and has nothing to do with hydraulic fracturing.
There you go with that deadbeat teenage dad syndrome.
I always taught my sons that they are responsible for any fluids they deposit into any cavities and anything produced as a result of depositing fluids into cavities. It’s a pretty basic principle that you should try to follow.
The problem with your lumping analogy as it relates to my prior discusion is it assumes that any well that produces hydrogen sulfide has been hydraulically fractured, which I can guarantee is not the case. Prior to the recent Bakken development in North Dakota, we produced from a number of other formations that contained hydrogen sulfide, but were never hydraulically fractured. Of the formations in North Dakota, the Bakken is one of the only ones that doesn’t naturally contain hydrogen sulfide.
A well does not have to be fracked to produce H2S but a fracked well can and often does produce H2S. If you frack it you own it.
The H2S is only on example. There are many others such as the example provided by Deborah that you conveniently failed to address.
But the fact is that several layers of H2S are drilled thru to get to the Bakken, and this is just released into the atmosphere, and there is no one in this industry that will tell you different. There is actually so much H2S in ND that the state has done studies on it. All workers in the ND oilfield are required to carry monitors.
In Texas, as with most Gas (and oil), H2S is attached to the gas, and although, H2S is not part of the fracking process, it is a direct by-product.
Without fracking of gas, and the large releases of H2S, I would be living a much different life than I am now.
There’s no need to ‘attempt’ to clarify your position, on what you do, most of us here, know more about the industry and the process, than chemical engineers who sit on petroleum boards.
Not true. Wells are not drilled in an underbalanced condition when drilling through the H2S bearing intervals. The hydrostatic pressure of the drilling fluid in the wellbore is designed to exceed the formation pressure in the formations that are drilled through above the Bakken, preventing them form producing. After the intermediate casing is run to the Bakken, cement is pumped to fill the annular space between the outside of the intermediate and the drilled hole to above all producing and injection zones effectively isolating all those formations from producing anything. They can only produce after that if a completion is attempted in that interval.
Are you saying that in ND the entire well bore is cemented? Because that is not typical industry practice and that is what got Range Resources in trouble in Parker County. In Texas, where they hold up our well bore requirements are the best in the country, they are only required to cement to 200′ below potable water. Most people don’t realize that the majority of the well bore is not cemented.
And, Monte, everything you wrote above is assuming that there are no human errors. That’s a huge risk you’re taking with our drinking water. It’s pretty clear to those of us who have to live in the areas where you guys work that you make plenty of errors and you cut corners all the time.
Wells in Texas produce H2S gas all the time, even the so-called dry gas wells. Some wells produce way more H2S than others which is why you see the wind socks on some wells so the workers will know which way to run if there is a release.
Of course, human error is possible, but there isn’t a single potentially dangerous activity performed by humans that doesn’t include the chance of human error.
Imagine if, for instance, you were required to prove that you would not make a single driving error before you were allowed to start your car and drive down the street or highway and put other driver potentially at risk. You could not prove that and therefor you could not ever drive your car.
However, reasonable people realise there is a risk, reduce it as much as possible with better designed cars, safer highways, better driver training, etc., and allow you to drive even though you can not prove you will not make a mistake and harm yourself or others.
The philosophy that would not allow you to drive if you could not prove you would not make a driving error is known as the Precautionary Principle. The Precautionary Principle is based on proving a negative hypothesis, which can never be proven conclusivily, as it would require an infinite number of tests. Anyone not performing an infinite number of tests would be confronted with the argument that if another test had been done it might have failed.
That is the same unreasonable requirement you just postulated concerning human error. Human error can be reduced to low numbers but can not be made to equal zero, and the oil and gas business is not alone in that limitation. Doctors cannot prove that they will never make a mistake but we don’t require them to quit providing medical care. Airplane pilots cannot prove they will never have an error but we don’t ground every airplane. The list is endless.
Oh thank you for using the dumb driving a car analogy. You guys always do that! Do you have a book or something with all the answers so you can just copy and paste.
1. I can choose whether or not to drive a car unlike having a drilling site in my backyard that pollutes my air and water. Driving a car is a risk I can take or not take.
2. If I drive a car recklessly I might hurt myself and maybe even someone else. When you guys contaminate an aquifer, it can effect so many people and animals, make them sick, give them cancer and weird tumors and ruin water for future generations–there is no way to clean an aquifer and there is no way to live without water.
It is unfortunate that you brought up the airline industry because I am very good friends with Calvin Tillman, former Mayor or Dish a tiny town that your industry has ruined. He happens to work for the FAA and he taught me a lot about airlines. The airline industry, unlike yours, has a very small percentage of mistakes–teeny tiny compared to yours–because it is HEAVILY regulated. If there is a mistake, they do not get to cover it with fresh dirt and walk away. There is a full rigorous investigation.
If a doctor makes a mistake, again, there is a full rigorous investigation. Sometimes they loose their license to operate. I have NEVER seen that happen with the Big Oil and Gas Mafia.
You cover your mistakes with fresh dirt or claim the victims are faking it like you did the lady in the video. Or you intimidate people into silence. Or, just say, “prove it.”
The way the Precautionary Principle works is that your industry would have to prove it can operate safely before starting up operations. This is something your industry has never had to do in the United States. However, I took several loads of French journalists on a tour of the Barnett Shale and they walked away horrified. Now France has said you can drill here when you prove it’s safe. Your industry has never been subjected to rigorous, independent scientific studies. Now the EPA is getting a start on that and you’re not fairing too well.
I have four words for you Monte: Preponderance of the evidence.
Can you please answer Deborah’s question now?
FYI, continuing to deny problems in the face of the obvious is not helping your case. You are not a good ambassador for your industry and there are many people watching.
I wish you crybabies had to do without gasoline and natural gas. Without some other source and you had to depend on yourselve to get them, you would help people you believe affected by these operations. Ever hear of cooperation? Where I live, in the shadow of one of the largest refineries in the world, surrounded by other refining and chemical operations – I’d move if I didn’t want to manage in this environment. Do you not understand that where the Pelly oilfield is located that there were homes? Our area has given up a lot to drill, refine etc. so that a great many people can have gasoline. Areas where the people won’t tolerate drilling, refining should have to do without gasoline for their cars, gas to heat their homes. Then they would figure out ways to get some . I believe I caught what’s causing this debate. Somebody mentioned “adequate compension.” Would you be less opposed to fracturing in your if ‘adequate compension “for relocationg farms and families was given to you?. We weren’t compensated at all. Some of the territory is messed up, but I have gasoline for my car and so do you crybabies, probably from our refineries. We get some pollution, I’m sure but we just tolerate it. The refining and drilling operations are much better than they used to be. I can remember when we caught fish and crabs out of the nearest bay, we could taste oily taste from the refinery. This went on for some time, but no longer, and a great many of you have gas for your cars, thanks to us.
I have copd, but not from the industries around here, but because selfish neighbors filed my property with smoke from land clearing debris (which is against the law)for 3 weeks and then burned an old house just across the property line, without removing the carpet, vinyl, wiring, air conditioners and insulation. I knew it was making me sick, but thought that was only temporary. I would have called the EPA earlier had I known about copd and that it is progressive. What with my lifetime here in the oil patch, I am still glad I have gas, and in WWar II we sent millions of gallons of gas etc. to help keep this country free so guys like you can play at being intellectuals. Stop it and HELP THOSE WHO NEED HELP, and try to be part of the solutions. Go for the compensation; that’s more than we had. Do without gas for your cars for a while and you will be amenable to suggestions.
Oh, and did you know that you could strike a match to water coming out of the faucet in Chambers County and gas is coming along with the water would burn. This is a natural phenom, not because of the refineries; this was before the oil boom here. people moved away from it, for the most part. A big part of the town of Mont Belview was bought by industry because they would not be safe with the new industry across the highway.
Life is not always easy. Help those who need it, go to court if you must. When you next get into your car and drive, the gas in your tank may very well come from our stinky neighborhood.
Cheerio, and happy driving!
emme from Tx.