Energy!

[Adieu]

It's fucking hilarious that I can have a drill engineer tell me to my face fracking is a problem but this guy who sits in an office claims it is no problem. The dude designs the drills and has a comma in his day rate. He literally does the high level math to get within feet of a target multiple thousands of feet in the ground. I'm pretty sure his word is reliable on the subject.

[sheatheman]

 

I have not seen the film, but judging by those hand signals in the still, he seems legit.

 

more rambling:

 

 

Most of the people afraid of fracking don't know anything about it. Environmentalists of today are comprised of 90% kneejerk fixie riders. All of the stuff about unknown chemicals in "fracking fluid" is made up. FracFocus is a chemical disclosure registry, and I look at forms for every completion report I file that tell me exactly what each well is fracked with. A frequent main ingredient is SiO2 (silicon dioxide).

 

The problem with fracking is the opposite of what most "activists" are saying. Most activists are just that, in that they fly around in helicopters very actively reporting on new fracking developments. What they should be saying is "hydraulic fracturing sure is a beautiful thing, as it enables me and my crew to fly around in this thing." The problem with fracking isn't that Big Oil is so evil, they are just doing the dirty work. The problem is our desires have pushed the oil industry to the height at which it now sits. There is no way for the ugly underbelly to be done away with unless we do away with the ugliness of our excess. But everyone wants that gold iphone, so...

 

 

 

I'm interested in the idea of collapsitarianism. I'm also interested in the idea of an oilman being a collapsitarian.

 

I love how you make all these comments about fracking safety, but you don't make one comment concerning the government produced water quality reports that specifically state that oil related damage is in fact a reality. All you did was laugh at the introduction to my statement. In the words of Daniel Plainview whom you seem so much to admire, "You look like a fffffoool....don't you?" Have you been to fucking Pecos or Big Spring? This is not something that is hidden. I'm still recovering from health problems that only started after I lived in Pecos.

 

 

Sorry to hear that. What kind of problems? I have never seen the government-produced water quality reports you're talking about. What division of government is producing them? Should I watch Gaslands again? All I'm saying is that it is in fact regulated, and that regulating is one of the main things I deal with in my job. I've been to Fort Stockton before, never Pecos or Big Springs.

 

How do you get the impression that I don't think fracking is a problem? You're obviously not reading what I'm writing. I absolutely think it's a problem. I'm just speaking to the ignorance on the subject.

 

The drilling engineer you spoke to designs drills AND works in the field? Wow. But you don't need to explain to me how drilling works. I'm not saying the conversation you had is not of importance, but imagine if that drilling engineer was 30 years older than you and was your father, and that you have had hundreds of conversations with him and have worked with him. Imagine if that drilling engineer also was in charge of all the other steps of the process, of putting a crew together, of fracking the well, and of plugging the well. Imagine if that drilling engineer's father in law was a Petroleum Engineer with over 50 years of experience, who you also have talked to hundreds of times. Now imagine that you're not you, but you're me!

 

I'm not trying to turn this into a my dad can beat up your dad argument, but you have to understand what it feels like for you to keep dangling a single conversation in my face when I have those conversations every day.

 

Edit: Also, WE are the powers that be. I try to live as minimally as possible. I'm starting an analogue forest commune.

[luke viia]

I'm interested in the idea of collapsitarianism. I'm also interested in the idea of an oilman being a collapsitarian.

 

pure unadulterated profiteering douchebaggery. "collapsitarian" ffs you started this thread off saying you believed fracking was necessary because otherwise people will die, now your position is that we should accelerate towards collapse.

 

nice ramblings on "90%" of environmentalists being fixie riding, helicopter owning ignorant consumers, btw. that surely added some common ground between you and the people you claim to be "educating" on this subject.

 

i'm not even gonna keep arguing with you here, that was enough to convince me you're just going to be a condescending dipshit if we try. have fun with your measly salary and "collapsism", fucks sake.

[Adieu]

 

 

I have not seen the film, but judging by those hand signals in the still, he seems legit.

 

more rambling:

 

 

Most of the people afraid of fracking don't know anything about it. Environmentalists of today are comprised of 90% kneejerk fixie riders. All of the stuff about unknown chemicals in "fracking fluid" is made up. FracFocus is a chemical disclosure registry, and I look at forms for every completion report I file that tell me exactly what each well is fracked with. A frequent main ingredient is SiO2 (silicon dioxide).

 

The problem with fracking is the opposite of what most "activists" are saying. Most activists are just that, in that they fly around in helicopters very actively reporting on new fracking developments. What they should be saying is "hydraulic fracturing sure is a beautiful thing, as it enables me and my crew to fly around in this thing." The problem with fracking isn't that Big Oil is so evil, they are just doing the dirty work. The problem is our desires have pushed the oil industry to the height at which it now sits. There is no way for the ugly underbelly to be done away with unless we do away with the ugliness of our excess. But everyone wants that gold iphone, so...

 

 

 

I'm interested in the idea of collapsitarianism. I'm also interested in the idea of an oilman being a collapsitarian.

 

I love how you make all these comments about fracking safety, but you don't make one comment concerning the government produced water quality reports that specifically state that oil related damage is in fact a reality. All you did was laugh at the introduction to my statement. In the words of Daniel Plainview whom you seem so much to admire, "You look like a fffffoool....don't you?" Have you been to fucking Pecos or Big Spring? This is not something that is hidden. I'm still recovering from health problems that only started after I lived in Pecos.

 

 

Sorry to hear that. What kind of problems? I have never seen the government-produced water quality reports you're talking about. What division of government is producing them? Should I watch Gaslands again? All I'm saying is that it is in fact regulated, and that regulating is one of the main things I deal with in my job. I've been to Fort Stockton before, never Pecos or Big Springs.

 

How do you get the impression that I don't think fracking is a problem? You're obviously not reading what I'm writing. I absolutely think it's a problem. I'm just speaking to the ignorance on the subject.

 

The drilling engineer you spoke to designs drills AND works in the field? Wow. But you don't need to explain to me how drilling works. I'm not saying the conversation you had is not of importance, but imagine if that drilling engineer was 30 years older than you and was your father, and that you have had hundreds of conversations with him and have worked with him. Imagine if that drilling engineer also was in charge of all the other steps of the process, of putting a crew together, of fracking the well, and of plugging the well. Imagine if that drilling engineer's father in law was a Petroleum Engineer with over 50 years of experience, who you also have talked to hundreds of times. Now imagine that you're not you, but you're me!

 

I'm not trying to turn this into a my dad can beat up your dad argument, but you have to understand what it feels like for you to keep dangling a single conversation in my face when I have those conversations every day.

 

Edit: Also, WE are the powers that be. I try to live as minimally as possible. I'm starting an analogue forest commune.

 

 

Well, I posted my water quality reports as links a page or so back. No one commented on them but they very clearly show damage to water quality based on oilfield related activity. I didn't check specifically but I'm pretty sure it's whatever agency governs water quality in the state of texas.

 

https://www.twdb.sta...ecos-valley.asp

http://www.mybigspri...lity_Report.pdf

http://www.coloradoc...Center/View/952

As far as health problems. Nervous system issues including physical manifestations of anxiety, extreme and unnatural social anxiety compared to previous, also what I expect to be thyroid problems and related skin quality issues, weak immune system, digestion problems, etc. But honestly I don't know what all of that can be contributed to those environments. All I know is that they began or worsened after my time there. I was an idiot and drank the water sort of regularly, and also did not use a shower filter. After being extremely vigilant in my efforts though I'm mostly ok now.

Your point on everyone having opinions from those around them is valid.

I'm pretty sure it's quite common for an engineer to visit drill sites. I have no idea how much time he spends in the field.

And we are not the powers that be. We can vote with our dollars, and choose specific lifestyles within a certain framework, but we are not multimillion dollar corporations with the power to influence entire societies. Our power is limited to scope of our individual choices and how well we are mobilized together towards a common goal. We do not buy votes in washington.

[sheatheman]

 

I'm interested in the idea of collapsitarianism. I'm also interested in the idea of an oilman being a collapsitarian.

 

pure unadulterated profiteering douchebaggery. "collapsitarian" ffs you started this thread off saying you believed fracking was necessary because otherwise people will die, now your position is that we should accelerate towards collapse.

 

nice ramblings on "90%" of environmentalists being fixie riding, helicopter owning ignorant consumers, btw. that surely added some common ground between you and the people you claim to be "educating" on this subject.

 

i'm not even gonna keep arguing with you here, that was enough to convince me you're just going to be a condescending dipshit if we try. have fun with your measly salary and "collapsism", fucks sake.

 

 

Luke, you misunderstand me. I didn't say I AM a collapsitarian. It is possible to be artistically interested in, even inspired by things that are negative. I write fiction. I'm interested in those themes. Whatever I'm doing, I'm always looking for material. Method living, basically. When I finish my MFA I don't know if I will keep working in the oil field.

 

I'm really happy with $26k/year. Together my wife and I are at around $45k. We rent a small house (700sqft) and are happy with that. More people should be happy with "measly" salaries. We don't have credit cards and therefore do not contribute to the debt crisis.

 

And you kinda proved my claim about environmentalists being kneejerks. You automatically interpreted that in the worst way possible, like you were looking for it. It's not like I am trying to hasten a collapse (accelerationism). I do the opposite, remember my feelings about bitcoin? Remember all the sick green lifestyle mods I enumerated previously (walking,publictrans,vegetarian,open windows instead of turning on lights)?

 

My statement about environmentalists was hyperbole, but I would apply that to any movement. Most people are the consumers of a movement rather than the producers. They become involved because it gives them meaning, not necessarily because they believe in it strongly. Most people probably think I am a cut and dry conservative. Not true. Most conservatives are consumers of conservatism, and it's the same with liberalism.

 

Besides, I'm not saying that those fixie riders are shallow people. Lots of fixie riders are my friends. I'm just using that because it's a well defined archetype, and being an archetype in part isn't a bad thing. When I say someone is a consumer of a movement, I'm saying that that movement doesn't define them. There is something else that they are invested in, passionate about. If this was IRL and I had the entirety of conversational subtlety at my disposal, you might disagree with me, but you would REALLY like me anyway. Especially if I've had a little white wine. I have recently discovered this latent beast of rhetoric residing inside of me that is only awakened when I've imbibed a little.

[sheatheman]

Well, I posted my water quality reports as links a page or so back. No one commented on them but they very clearly show damage to water quality based on oilfield related activity. I didn't check specifically but I'm pretty sure it's whatever agency governs water quality in the state of texas.

 

https://www.twdb.sta...ecos-valley.asp

http://www.mybigspri...lity_Report.pdf

http://www.coloradoc...Center/View/952

 

Barium in Colorado City and Sulfate in Big Springs. Neither one of those appear to be a violation, and it does say that there are no associated adverse health effects. Just saying...

 

Looks like the TCEQ did those tests.

[chenGOD]

Just read through the city of Big Springs report - from my pisspoor plebeian understanding of the world, it seems that all contaminants were below the Maximum Contaminant Levels, at least at average levels. There were some occasions where the maximum level rose above the MCL, but it seems that those contaminants were byproducts of drinking water disinfection, so it was after drinking water had been made safe.

Some of the substances sampled for are non-harmful?

 

However, I do think that fracking is a short-term solution to a very serious problem.

[luke viia]

 

 

I'm interested in the idea of collapsitarianism. I'm also interested in the idea of an oilman being a collapsitarian.

 

pure unadulterated profiteering douchebaggery. "collapsitarian" ffs you started this thread off saying you believed fracking was necessary because otherwise people will die, now your position is that we should accelerate towards collapse.

 

nice ramblings on "90%" of environmentalists being fixie riding, helicopter owning ignorant consumers, btw. that surely added some common ground between you and the people you claim to be "educating" on this subject.

 

i'm not even gonna keep arguing with you here, that was enough to convince me you're just going to be a condescending dipshit if we try. have fun with your measly salary and "collapsism", fucks sake.

 

 

1. Luke, you misunderstand me. I didn't say I AM a collapsitarian. It is possible to be artistically interested in, even inspired by things that are negative. I write fiction. I'm interested in those themes. Whatever I'm doing, I'm always looking for material. Method living, basically. When I finish my MFA I don't know if I will keep working in the oil field.

 

2. I'm really happy with $26k/year. Together my wife and I are at around $45k. We rent a small house (700sqft) and are happy with that. More people should be happy with "measly" salaries. We don't have credit cards and therefore do not contribute to the debt crisis.

 

3. And you kinda proved my claim about environmentalists being kneejerks. You automatically interpreted that in the worst way possible, like you were looking for it. It's not like I am trying to hasten a collapse (accelerationism). I do the opposite, remember my feelings about bitcoin? Remember all the sick green lifestyle mods I enumerated previously (walking,publictrans,vegetarian,open windows instead of turning on lights)?

 

4. My statement about environmentalists was hyperbole, but I would apply that to any movement. Most people are the consumers of a movement rather than the producers. They become involved because it gives them meaning, not necessarily because they believe in it strongly. Most people probably think I am a cut and dry conservative. Not true. Most conservatives are consumers of conservatism, and it's the same with liberalism.

 

5. Besides, I'm not saying that those fixie riders are shallow people. Lots of fixie riders are my friends. I'm just using that because it's a well defined archetype, and being an archetype in part isn't a bad thing. When I say someone is a consumer of a movement, I'm saying that that movement doesn't define them. There is something else that they are invested in, passionate about. If this was IRL and I had the entirety of conversational subtlety at my disposal, you might disagree with me, but you would REALLY like me anyway. Especially if I've had a little white wine. I have recently discovered this latent beast of rhetoric residing inside of me that is only awakened when I've imbibed a little.

 

 

1. fair enough. "i'm interested in x" is fine artistically.

 

2. agreed, more people should be happy with low to moderate income.

 

3. agreed on the first sentence; i don't agree with the second. one, i'm not being kneejerk - we've had a patient discussion itt. my post was in response to your hyperbole.

 

4. consumers of a movement? i don't agree. people involved in political action are producers of political movement, which is the flipside of what you suggest.

 

5. yes, let us get drunk together. meet me in chatmm.

[Adieu]

 

Well, I posted my water quality reports as links a page or so back. No one commented on them but they very clearly show damage to water quality based on oilfield related activity. I didn't check specifically but I'm pretty sure it's whatever agency governs water quality in the state of texas.

 

https://www.twdb.sta...ecos-valley.asp

http://www.mybigspri...lity_Report.pdf

http://www.coloradoc...Center/View/952

 

Barium in Colorado City and Sulfate in Big Springs. Neither one of those appear to be a violation, and it does say that there are no associated adverse health effects. Just saying...

 

Looks like the TCEQ did those tests.

 

 

 

Just read through the city of Big Springs report - from my pisspoor plebeian understanding of the world, it seems that all contaminants were below the Maximum Contaminant Levels, at least at average levels. There were some occasions where the maximum level rose above the MCL, but it seems that those contaminants were byproducts of drinking water disinfection, so it was after drinking water had been made safe.

Some of the substances sampled for are non-harmful?

 

However, I do think that fracking is a short-term solution to a very serious problem.

 

 

Ok, guys.

 

The maximum allowable is the HIGHEST ALLOWABLE before being in violation. The secondary is the amount that is ideal, or the desired amount.

 

If you look at the numbers for secondary constituents in regards to Big Spring's report. You'll see that all of them are at exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE level, and nowhere close to the secondary limit. Is this not an immediate red flag to you guys? Do you really think that having something at the exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE level is healthy? Do you even think those reading are legitimate if it is at the exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE? Personally, I don't believe so, or the standards were altered so that they could more easily stay within the limit. Not to mention the reading is an average. Even if you don't believe that this is a problem you still have to maintain that there is an obvious environmental impact happening here. Also, if either of you drove through Big Spring you would change your tune. It smells like chemical death in that town. It burns your nostrils. Why? Because there is a refinery there. It's fucking gross. The secondary limit is set to be the ideal or the desired limit. So, there's that too.

 

But you know, I think you're foolish if you believe that drinking some water that has the HIGHEST ALLOWABLE of something harmful versus nothing of something harmful is going to have the same effect. Let's not forget as well, these readings are parts per million. That is how powerful these chemicals are.

 

Colorado City had violations in regards to Radioactive contaminants, and Inorganic Contaminants.

 

Let's not kid ourselves about the likely source of these inorganic contaminants. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/drinkingwater/inorg_con.htm

 

Radioactive by products from oil drilling. - http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/oilandgas.html

 

and, Pecos, well, that's quite obvious.

 

Keep in mind this is only three cities guys. There are a lot of cities in Texas that have large scale oil operations.

 

Also, note that allowable limits are not always safe, and vary by difference of opinion. For instance, the EU has standards set for the allowable amount of Ochratoxin in coffee by ppb. The USA does not even set a standard. Think about that next time you go to Starfucks and poison yourself.

 

Another edit. Not just the EU. But for some reason the USA doesn't think it's an issue.

 

http://services.leatherheadfood.com/eman/FactSheet.aspx?ID=79

[awepittance]

still fascinated an 'industry insider' has basically told us we are all fucked and fracking is a desperate measure to stave off the inevitable. interesting to say the least

[Adieu]

still fascinated an 'industry insider' has basically told us we are all fucked and fracking is a desperate measure to stave off the inevitable. interesting to say the least

 

I haven't looked into it too much, but the impressions I've had from people who care makes it seem like we have a large amount of oil left. We can drill seriously deep now. Basically, all the old leases where they drilled dry holes or stopped producing before we had modern drilling technology have been leased again to be drilled deeper. So, I dunno. I feel like scientists would be freaking out if we were at dire straits in regards to available energy, and the oil companies would probably be developing alternative sources for their own benefit. But like I said,I've not looked into that much. Maybe T. Boone Pickens is onto something, or maybe he just wants to push his investments as far as he can.

[sheatheman]

All in all, I don't have much to worry about, as I use a Brita filter for my coffee water, and the beans I buy? You guessed it: fair trade.

[awepittance]

So, I dunno. I feel like scientists would be freaking out if we were at dire straits in regards to available energy,

 

a lot of scientists are freaking out, but i sense that you mean some kind of authoritative scientific consensus, i don't know if we can rely on those kinds of bodies anymore to let us, the public know when there is a serious issue we need to be prepared for. Fukushima for example, when do we know to start 'worrying' when Tepco tells us to? When the mainstream media tells us to start? When some official from the US government comes out and tells us to freak out? If you're waiting for scientists to tell us to freak out about that, unless they put their careers on the line I doubt that any serious scientist is going to risk being seen as an irrational doomsayer until it seems unrisky to do that.

[Adieu]

All in all, I don't have much to worry about, as I use a Brita filter for my coffee water, and the beans I buy? You guessed it: fair trade.

 

Not to derail here, as I was only using that as an example of the arbitrary nature of allowable limits, but most coffee purchased in the US will be affected by Ochratoxin and other mycotoxin exposure. This has to do with a lot of different variables in regards to coffee production, packaging, roasting, distribution, and storage. Free trade doesn't mean anything necessarily. But if you're a coffee guy go for organic, single origin, high-altitude central american, wet processed, and on-site roasted. If they roast themselves you know they control the process and you can make sure they aren't roasting large blended batches. Third Roast Coffee in Austin, Texas is supposed to be pretty much the best quality coffee you can get around here.

 

 

So, I dunno. I feel like scientists would be freaking out if we were at dire straits in regards to available energy,

 

a lot of scientists are freaking out, but i sense that you mean some kind of authoritative scientific consensus, i don't know if we can rely on those kinds of bodies anymore to let us, the public know when there is a serious issue we need to be prepared for. Fukushima for example, when do we know to start 'worrying' when Tepco tells us to? When the mainstream media tells us to start? When some official from the US government comes out and tells us to freak out? If you're waiting for scientists to tell us to freak out about that, unless they put their careers on the line I doubt that any serious scientist is going to risk being seen as an irrational doomsayer until it seems unrisky to do that.

 

 

Yeah good point. Even if you were to say anything right now it would be spun as anti-business, and promoting the liberal green agenda.

[sheatheman]

Adieu, your sarcasm shield is quite impressive.

[Adieu]

Adieu, your sarcasm shield is quite impressive.

 

I'm an INTJ, I scored 31 on the autism spectrum test, and I am on an IDM forum. I'm at natural disadvantage here. No shield necessary.

[chenGOD]

 

 

Well, I posted my water quality reports as links a page or so back. No one commented on them but they very clearly show damage to water quality based on oilfield related activity. I didn't check specifically but I'm pretty sure it's whatever agency governs water quality in the state of texas.

 

https://www.twdb.sta...ecos-valley.asp

http://www.mybigspri...lity_Report.pdf

http://www.coloradoc...Center/View/952

 

Barium in Colorado City and Sulfate in Big Springs. Neither one of those appear to be a violation, and it does say that there are no associated adverse health effects. Just saying...

 

Looks like the TCEQ did those tests.

 

 

 

Just read through the city of Big Springs report - from my pisspoor plebeian understanding of the world, it seems that all contaminants were below the Maximum Contaminant Levels, at least at average levels. There were some occasions where the maximum level rose above the MCL, but it seems that those contaminants were byproducts of drinking water disinfection, so it was after drinking water had been made safe.

Some of the substances sampled for are non-harmful?

 

However, I do think that fracking is a short-term solution to a very serious problem.

 

 

Ok, guys.

 

The maximum allowable is the HIGHEST ALLOWABLE before being in violation. The secondary is the amount that is ideal, or the desired amount.

 

If you look at the numbers for secondary constituents in regards to Big Spring's report. You'll see that all of them are at exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE level, and nowhere close to the secondary limit. Is this not an immediate red flag to you guys? Do you really think that having something at the exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE level is healthy? Do you even think those reading are legitimate if it is at the exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE? Personally, I don't believe so, or the standards were altered so that they could more easily stay within the limit. Not to mention the reading is an average. Even if you don't believe that this is a problem you still have to maintain that there is an obvious environmental impact happening here. Also, if either of you drove through Big Spring you would change your tune. It smells like chemical death in that town. It burns your nostrils. Why? Because there is a refinery there. It's fucking gross. The secondary limit is set to be the ideal or the desired limit. So, there's that too.

 

But you know, I think you're foolish if you believe that drinking some water that has the HIGHEST ALLOWABLE of something harmful versus nothing of something harmful is going to have the same effect. Let's not forget as well, these readings are parts per million. That is how powerful these chemicals are.

 

Colorado City had violations in regards to Radioactive contaminants, and Inorganic Contaminants.

 

Let's not kid ourselves about the likely source of these inorganic contaminants. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/drinkingwater/inorg_con.htm

 

Radioactive by products from oil drilling. - http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/oilandgas.html

 

and, Pecos, well, that's quite obvious.

 

Keep in mind this is only three cities guys. There are a lot of cities in Texas that have large scale oil operations.

 

Also, note that allowable limits are not always safe, and vary by difference of opinion. For instance, the EU has standards set for the allowable amount of Ochratoxin in coffee by ppb. The USA does not even set a standard. Think about that next time you go to Starfucks and poison yourself.

 

Another edit. Not just the EU. But for some reason the USA doesn't think it's an issue.

 

http://services.leatherheadfood.com/eman/FactSheet.aspx?ID=79

 

 

Shit, thanks for explaining the acronyms for me. I don't htink i would have understood them otherwise.

I just wonder about that line under the heading "Secondary and other constituents not regulated". The one that says, "no associated adverse health effects". I r dumb, so can u splain it 2 me?

[Adieu]

 

 

 

Well, I posted my water quality reports as links a page or so back. No one commented on them but they very clearly show damage to water quality based on oilfield related activity. I didn't check specifically but I'm pretty sure it's whatever agency governs water quality in the state of texas.

 

https://www.twdb.sta...ecos-valley.asp

http://www.mybigspri...lity_Report.pdf

http://www.coloradoc...Center/View/952

 

Barium in Colorado City and Sulfate in Big Springs. Neither one of those appear to be a violation, and it does say that there are no associated adverse health effects. Just saying...

 

Looks like the TCEQ did those tests.

 

 

 

Just read through the city of Big Springs report - from my pisspoor plebeian understanding of the world, it seems that all contaminants were below the Maximum Contaminant Levels, at least at average levels. There were some occasions where the maximum level rose above the MCL, but it seems that those contaminants were byproducts of drinking water disinfection, so it was after drinking water had been made safe.

Some of the substances sampled for are non-harmful?

 

However, I do think that fracking is a short-term solution to a very serious problem.

 

 

Ok, guys.

 

The maximum allowable is the HIGHEST ALLOWABLE before being in violation. The secondary is the amount that is ideal, or the desired amount.

 

If you look at the numbers for secondary constituents in regards to Big Spring's report. You'll see that all of them are at exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE level, and nowhere close to the secondary limit. Is this not an immediate red flag to you guys? Do you really think that having something at the exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE level is healthy? Do you even think those reading are legitimate if it is at the exact HIGHEST ALLOWABLE? Personally, I don't believe so, or the standards were altered so that they could more easily stay within the limit. Not to mention the reading is an average. Even if you don't believe that this is a problem you still have to maintain that there is an obvious environmental impact happening here. Also, if either of you drove through Big Spring you would change your tune. It smells like chemical death in that town. It burns your nostrils. Why? Because there is a refinery there. It's fucking gross. The secondary limit is set to be the ideal or the desired limit. So, there's that too.

 

But you know, I think you're foolish if you believe that drinking some water that has the HIGHEST ALLOWABLE of something harmful versus nothing of something harmful is going to have the same effect. Let's not forget as well, these readings are parts per million. That is how powerful these chemicals are.

 

Colorado City had violations in regards to Radioactive contaminants, and Inorganic Contaminants.

 

Let's not kid ourselves about the likely source of these inorganic contaminants. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/drinkingwater/inorg_con.htm

 

Radioactive by products from oil drilling. - http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/oilandgas.html

 

and, Pecos, well, that's quite obvious.

 

Keep in mind this is only three cities guys. There are a lot of cities in Texas that have large scale oil operations.

 

Also, note that allowable limits are not always safe, and vary by difference of opinion. For instance, the EU has standards set for the allowable amount of Ochratoxin in coffee by ppb. The USA does not even set a standard. Think about that next time you go to Starfucks and poison yourself.

 

Another edit. Not just the EU. But for some reason the USA doesn't think it's an issue.

 

http://services.leatherheadfood.com/eman/FactSheet.aspx?ID=79

 

 

Shit, thanks for explaining the acronyms for me. I don't htink i would have understood them otherwise.

I just wonder about that line under the heading "Secondary and other constituents not regulated". The one that says, "no associated adverse health effects". I r dumb, so can u splain it 2 me?

 

 

Ok, so I missed that part. Regardless, it is obviously negatively effecting the water supply which means it is still having an environmental impact. I also question why a benign chemical would be measured, and limited. It's just one example though.

[joshuatxuk]

Well, I'm in the camp of "some fracking done with restraint, some fracking too reckless" in the sense that Eagle Ford seems pretty much an a-ok place to drill whereas much of the drilling in Barnett_Shale is genuinely alarming. Drilling was far, far more dangerous and damaging in the past, but areas are so populated and infrastructure so susceptible to contamination that the idea of urban/suburban drilling still freaks me out a bit.

 

^FYI: I have no where near the wealth of knowledge or any experience comparable to my fellow Texan watmmers. Just my harmless but nonetheless uninformed 2 cents.

[sheatheman]

Josh you freaking diplomat. I agree with everything you said.

 

The moral of the story is we should not hesitate to pour money into solar. If we would just be happy with moving at a slower pace, we could sustain ourselves just like Flora.

 

What about hybrid plants that can interface with circuitry and send energy to a battery of batteries? And what if the batteries were plant based? What if a solar farm was just that: a farm?

 

 

Adieu, your sarcasm shield is quite impressive.

 

I'm an INTJ, I scored 31 on the autism spectrum test, and I am on an IDM forum. I'm at natural disadvantage here. No shield necessary.

 

 

I'm a 17.

[Guest]

<11