Texas Sharon's Bluedaze

Fracking News

VIDEO from the methane migration in Marcellus

By

Just another case of methane migration. There are so many these days who can keep track. But the video is really cool and reminds me of the videos HERE.

For more information see: Snake Creek Bubbling With Methane In Susquehanna County, PA

Here’s a little update on this methane migration:

Methane gas found in three wells, two streams
Thursday, May 24, 2012
By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Better not call the EPA though, that could result in a conspiracy to defame the fracker since there has never, EVER been one case of…

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.

Comments

  1. Mike Knapp says

    New York accent? Check. Ridiculously holding a lighter to a creek? Check. Falsely blaming tiny methane bubbles in a creek in the middle of an area saturated with naturally occurring shallow methane on Marcellus shale methane migration? Check.

    I’m going to go with Vera Scroggins for $500 Alex.

    • Tim Ruggiero says

      And I’m going to go with “Where’s the fracking long list of GOOD OPERATORS that Mike Knapp claims to exist and still hasn’t provided for over a month” for $1000.00 Alex. Waiting, waiting, waiting. You’re losing credibility faster than Aubrey can piss away a billion dollars.

      • anon says

        How are you supposed to even answer that loaded question? What quantitative measures constitute a good operator?

        • Tim Ruggiero says

          Landman Mike said in prior discussions that regulations were to ensure that ‘everyone played by the rules’, but that there were mostly good operators. I simply requested him several times now to provide that list of ‘good operators’, and used his most recent post to remind him once again that we’re still waiting on that list. The criteria for what makes up a ‘good operator’ has already been well hashed out in prior posts. It’s not my blog, but if it were, anyone could post whatever they wanted, but I certainly wouldn’t let people like Mike avoid putting his money where his mouth is, and cherry pick what he wanted to comment on or avoid because he didn’t have a very good answer.

          I can only conclude that since Mike Knapp has failed to provide at least one ‘good operator’ he knows there aren’t any that will stand up to the slightest scrutiny. The fact of that matter is, there are no good operators, only some that are better than others-the better bad, I’d call them.

    • Khepry Quixote says

      Mr. Knapp,

      Please see my comment below for a more “polite” response. My “less polite” reply is as follows:

      Categorizing people based upon their accents is a non-productive way of persuading people to your point-of-view. An example of folks I would not demean because of their accents would be most of the snipers in the military. The Armed Services draws heavily from the regions of the United States that regard hunting as an integral part of their culture. Can you guess what parts of the country those might be? Can you guess what accents most of those snipers might possess? Would you denigrate them to their faces based upon their accents? Would you still denigrate them for the way they talk knowing that their “skills” might save the life of your child serving as a soldier in Afghanistan or as a law enforcement officer in the United States?

      “Falsely blaming tiny bubbles in a creek” implies that you know beyond a reasonable doubt that the phenomenon documented in the video is naturally-occurring. “A reasonable doubt” is damn close to 100% sure. Are you 100% sure that said phenomenon is false?

      I for one, will maintain a healthy skepticism of all claims. That being said, I’ve enough experience in this world that I’m more inclined to initially accept and then based upon subsequent research and experience, disbelieve. People don’t usually go to these lengths (e.g. blogs, videos, depositions) for idle purposes. They’ve been motivated someway, somehow, to document the changes around them. It’s that motivation that makes me more of an initial believer than a skeptic.

      Certainly not their accents.

  2. anon says

    Apparently someone has a soft spot for Mark Ruffalo, as my comment didn’t make it through the filter :'(

    • TXsharon says

      No clue what you are talking about there anon. Some comments automatically go to my spam folder with I empty occasionally.

      I normally allow all comments no matter how ignorant or misguided.

  3. Anonymous says

    Huh! Methane migration–report the specific location to the TRRC and watch it “go away” and never be talked about anymore.

  4. Khepry Quixote says

    Some observations are in order here:

    1. As a general rule, most people don’t start taking videos of methane-laced bubbling streams unless they have perceived a change in their environment. There are a thousand other things to be done in a busy person’s life, of which recording flaming bubbles would normally be significantly down on the list. Something usually has to be happening in order for people to “activate” in this manner.

    2. Many people start to “activate” when they are beginning to notice unusual patterns, either empirically (e.g. flaming water from their kitchen faucets) or anecdotally (e.g. word-of-mouth citation of observations or symptoms; casual observation of smells, discharges, or environmental degradation).

    3. Some people really “activate”:
    ~ when they notice their concerns are dismissed off-hand or discourteously.
    ~ when they ask for information via official channels and receive no acknowledgement of their requests.
    ~ when they do receive responses, the responses are dismissive, evasive, or false.
    ~ when they notice information that was available begin to disappear from public view, either through omission or “paywalls”.
    ~ when they notice that “problems” are “resolved” by non-disclosure agreements coupled with “hush money”.
    ~ when they see water buffalo after water buffalo in the yards of their neighbors and in the surrounding community.
    ~ when their intuition, honed from years of experience and hard knocks, tells them that they are being “shined on”.

    4. People also “activate” when one:
    ~ messes with them personally.
    ~ messes with their children.
    ~ costs them money.
    ~ inconveniences them significantly
    or all of the above.

    In conclusion, it is not so much that the video was made that is compelling as much as it is what would drive so many people to start documenting perceived anomalies in their surroundings. People start doing things like documenting the anomalies in their surroundings when they start to feel like their once semi-stable environment is beginning to spin out-of-control. It’s the “powerlessness” that drives their behavior, just as it was when our forefathers wrote the “Declaration of Independence” to cite their grievances with an oppressive regime imposed upon them by outsiders an ocean away.

    • WCGasette says

      Excellent comment. Thank you. For our community, it was the placement of seismic testing equipment without permission from anyone throughout our unleased neighborhoods followed by Thumper Trucks thumping for gas 2 weeks later. We’re coming up on the 2 year anniversary for that event.

      The Thumpers were escorted by our city police who told us they were not told what these trucks were doing. They were in city-owned police cars wearing their official city police uniforms. Then it was followed by a lot more…real fast.