three eyes keith haring

Steve Lipsky, homeowner from Weatherford, Texas  shut off his well when it stopped working because of a build up of methane gas. In 2011 the US. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined that ‘Range Resources’ drilling activities at a nearby fracking project had contaminated Lipsky’s well.

Steve Lipsky

Steve Lipsky

He installed a vent to allow some of the gas to escape for safety reasons; [gas measuring 50,000 parts per million (p.p.m) is considered a level for potential explosion. Air samples taken directly from Lipsky’s water well headspace vent showed levels exceeding 900,000 p.p.m] – so he attached a hose to the vent. He turns on the hose for testing and to demonstrate the presence of methane gas by lighting it. His neighbours have the same problem.

‘Range Resources’ spent millions of dollars attacking the EPA’s finding and the EPA backed down from the fight though they have not retracted their findings.

Lipsky’s claims against ‘Range Resources‘ have been blocked but they are suing him for defamation. They claim that the use of the hose made it seem like Lipsky was setting his water on fire (whereas in fact it was the escaped gas and not the actual water)!

What a sophistical argument! It just shows how biased and intimidated the courts are, in favour of business interest if such an argument can be expected to win. Steve Lipsky must fight and/or face financial ruin. He spends $1,000 a month trucking in water.

What would you do? He can’t sell his house! Nobody would buy it.

David must fight Goliath. But who is Goliath? = the corrupt financial system

help-goliath

 

Methane is the primary gas in natural gas.

If great quantities of methane were in the water aquifers of cities you would not be able to light your tap because the water is being used all the time and the methane stays in the water; the flaming tap demonstrations in U.S. happen in private wells where the methane collects in the well headspace.

In the U.S. the first wells that have been poisoned have been shown to coincide with fault lines – the wells are in lines above them.

Fracking can open up a path into the fault lines and on into the water table. U.K. has 400 x more fault lines than U.S. This must make fracking 400 x more dangerous.

Methane can also leak through cracks in the well – shaft and at every stage of the fracking process; 5% of wells fail immediately, all wells fail eventually.

If 3% of methane leaks from fracking then it’s as dirty as coal  –  (in fact leaks are between 6% – 12%)  –  In a 20 year period methane is 80%-100% more powerful and polluting than CO2!

I’m going on holiday, I will put Part 3 up when I get back 2nd week of August. Meanwhile I’ve done this artwork that you can download.

Vivienne Westwood Fracking Poster

Click for hires image

Share this post

fb-logo-sm
Tweet
  1. This is lazy and simplistic. The suggestion that 400 times the number of fault lines means 400 times the risk is sensationalist rubbish. At what depth are the faults? What was the well’s target depth compared with UK? This is another infantile straw man argument designed to frighten the lay person. Also, when used as a fuel, natural gas is considerably less damaging than the coal it replaces. Keep a sense of perspective, please.

    Comment by Ian on 29/07/2014 at 6:11 pm

  2. I am no expert and the assertion that the risk of fracking is directly related to the number of fault lines may not be correct, but that does not justify Ian using the language of abuse to disparageclear and reasonable concerns about fracking. Is Ian trying to suggest fracking is totally safe? or does he accept that there are serious doubts about its safety and should not be undertaken lightly is such an overcrowded country such as the UK?

    Comment by Tim on 09/08/2014 at 1:48 pm