epa and fracking, page-6

News starting to flow out of Washington DC on this subject now, article from Forbes

How the US are refering to it

"As for a blanket federal ban on fracking? The analysts figure that not even Washington bureacrats suffer such severe “cranial rectosis"

GLTA
R

How Could You Possibly Have A Problem With Diesel-Based Gas Fracking?
11/29/2011 @ 10:34AM

An article on Sunday in North Dakota’s Bismarck Tribune raised the spectre that the EPA might soon ban hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells. Really? Well, that’s the belief of Lynn Helms, director of North Dakota’s Department of Mineral Resources. If a fracking ban were to be put into place it would be disaster for North Dakota’s economic boom. The state is the key beneficiary of development of the Bakken Shale oil play, which contains upwards of 24 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Recoverable, that is, only with the help of fracking. Without fracking, North Dakota’s boomtimes would come to a neck-wrenching halt.

Helms may be guilty of a bit of hyperbole in his assessment of the EPA’s intentions on fracking. Analysts at Tudor, Pickering & Holt in Houston think the only worry could be over the practice of fracking with diesel fuel. In North Dakota drillers often use diesel in their fracks because it is a good lubricant even in frigid Dakota winters.

Even though the concentrations of diesel used are less than .1% of the millions of gallons of frack fluids injected down a well, the practice gets special scrutiny. According to the Safe Drinking Water Act, once diesel is mixed into a frack job the well is subject to special permitting requirements that don’t apply if there’s no diesel involved. So, says Tudor, Pickering, Helm’s concerns would only apply to the diesel-frack subset.

As for a blanket federal ban on fracking? The analysts figure that not even Washington bureacrats suffer such severe “cranial rectosis.” Stop fracking, and nat gas prices would surge from $3.37 per thousand cubic feet today to $12, in a heartbeat.

My question is: how could anyone have a problem with injecting a tiny whiff of diesel down into an oil well? Think about what’s trapped in the rock already — crude oil, natural gas and liquids like propane, butane and natural gasoline. As long as a well bore is properly cased to protect shallow groundwater from pollution, how can adding a tiny bit of diesel to that chemical combo be objectionable? If we follow the environmentalist logic, then oil companies should be praised for sucking up all those dangerous hydrocarbons out of the ground. Right?

For those who still think diesel is dangerous, don’t worry, it’s being phased out anyways. Mineral oil, that stuff we rub on the skin of babies, works just about as well and doesn’t fall afoul of the Safe Drinking Water Act. What’s ironic: just like diesel, mineral oil is distilled from petroleum too.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2011/11/29/how-could-you-possibly-have-a-problem-with-diesel-based-gas-fracking/