Comments for wyofile.com

Comment on Deer-ly Departed: Revelation of mule deer ‘stop-over’ behavior may alter drilling plans in Bridger Teton Forest by JC

JC — Sat, 19 May 2012 21:13:03 +0000

Thank you so very much for the very detailed and insightful article. The Hoback Basin is a critical ecosystem and hopefully the outpouring of support to retire these leases gets the point across.

Keep up the great journalism!

Comment on What is all this frackin’ nonsense? by RTC

RTC — Sat, 19 May 2012 04:48:14 +0000

Some lively dialogue is going on here. Speaking of Drake, one of my aunts contended that our family was descended from Lord Baltimore and Sir Francis Drake. Two branches of the family found wealth in oil in Pennsylvania (Drake) and Louisiana (McIlhenny). The third branch, mine, did not.

In response to my smart remark about radioactive peas, Mr. Garrett asked a question. I have spoken with engineers at the Wyoming Oil and Gas Commission and oil companies which drill horizontal wells. Radioactive isotopes are not blended with frac fluids. Isotopes with short half-lives, comparable to those used for human bone scans, are used for well logging. Measuring gamma rays from isotopes can gauge the distance that fractures in a formation extend from the well bore. For example, in the Niobrara formation in Wyoming, a sequential frac job from a mile-long horizontal bore might extend 200 feet vertically and 1,000 feet horizontally within the shale. It is rare, I am told, but some companies pump sand with isotopes into the fissures and then use a tool to log the pulses from the radionuclides. See http://www.corelab.com/pe/protechnics/Tracers/tracersServices.aspx for detailed explanations. I am getting an education.

Just in case there might be confusion, it’s disclosure time: “RTC” is “The Sage Grouse”, and RTC’s day job is as an attorney representing landowners, oil and gas companies, uranium companies and mineral owners.

Comment on Oil and gas lobby overstates job potential by Rob Davidson

Rob Davidson — Thu, 17 May 2012 23:38:26 +0000

“They smell blood,” said Schenkel. “There’s this idea that all regulation can effectively be labeled as job-killing. ”
Our congressional delegation is drinking from this same cup; mindless of how programmed they appear spouting the same made up job estimates and impacts.
The Canadians have it even worse. The Prime Minister openly calling anyone who wants review of impacts on their homelands or communities domestic terrorists.
Bleizefffer nails another story and analysis; thank you.

Comment on What is all this frackin’ nonsense? by Richard Garrett

Richard Garrett — Wed, 16 May 2012 21:25:48 +0000

RTC — Thanks for the reply and exchange of ideas.
Trucks are hauling fracturing fluids and components and they are doing so for a specific purpose. It is not logical to think that absent that purpose that the trucks would be used for an equivalent amount of miles and trips while hauling “coal, acid, ethanol.” Thus accident statistics have everything to do with oil and gas, particularly when, as the NY Times story reports, workers are required to drive after working extended shifts.
You made it absolutely clear that you think improper disposal is reprehensible. My point is that like any other waste, there really is no risk free disposal technique for fracturing fluid. Some communities in the northeast even see fracturing fluid treatment as an economic resource opportunity. We should all be more mindful of waste and the consequence of its production and disposal.
I know you are not an advocate of improper workplace behavior and I know the companies discourage that too. But you do point out that once you were very young. Close and consistent supervision must be a mandate. I know some companies do this very well, others not so well.
Finally, please don’t take my observations as reason to “shut down an industry”. Natural gas production when done right provides many benefits to the state and nation while off-setting some of the problems associated with other energy resources. The technology, process, and implementation of hydraulic fracturing (as is the case with any energy production and use) should be transparent and made as safe and reliable as possible. We as energy consumers should be mindful and careful about our energy choices — we owe that to future generations.

Comment on What is all this frackin’ nonsense? by DeweyV

DeweyV — Wed, 16 May 2012 14:22:46 +0000

Well, if all the mojo used in fracking is relatively harmless, then why are the companies doing a fullcourt lobbying press, drawing lines in the sand , and going to war to prevent disclosing the recipes ? Does this not shout ” We’ve got something to hide here “….? It does to me. Just because they have been fracking since the Truman administration does not give the industry carte blanche approval by default.

Let’s do a quick poll : Do you trust the oil and gas companies to come clean ? Y [___] N [___]

Comment on What is all this frackin’ nonsense? by Rob Davidson

Rob Davidson — Wed, 16 May 2012 03:46:05 +0000

Hand in hand with disclosure of the chemicals used in hydralic fracking, needs to be standards for well integrity. There are two reasons the issue is the news forefront. One is Wyoming’s DEQ and Oil and Gas Commission failure to intervene and do their duty in the Clark’s Fork and Pavillion area excursions of drilling and fracking fluids as they affected local water supplies. I have met some of the most affected and they were not fans of the Feds and the EPA, but Wyoming failed them. Second is the boom in PA and NY with the Marcellus Shale gas. Good ‘ol boys from Texas and Oklahoma set loose in the northeast without the locals knowing what these boys would do with all their nasty gunk and no real oil field regulation since Drake have set loose a public relations diaster that API might not fix. These are not classic deep Rocky Mountain tight formations, instead roll and fold like a jelly roll in true Appalacian mountain style…push here and it comes out in the next holler.

Comment on What is all this frackin’ nonsense? by RTC

RTC — Wed, 16 May 2012 03:14:07 +0000

Responding to Mr. Garrett: Traffic accidents could and would happen if the trucks hauling frac fluids were instead hauling something else, like coal, acid or ethanol; traffic safety statistics have little to do with oil and gas practices.
See “fracfocus.org” for a list of chemicals which are used in fracturing, many of which are common salts and solvents, and things like acetic acid (vinegar). Isotopes are sometimes used for logging, but there are no isotopes that I know about which are used in frac fluids.
I made the point that irresponsible disposal of produced fluids is reprehensible.
I thought I made the point that misbehavior on the well site needs to be prohibited too.
A few stupid incidents do not constitute a reason to shut down an industry, but continuing to push for best practices is always a good, even necessary, idea.

The Sage Grouse

Comment on What is all this frackin’ nonsense? by Richard Garrett

Richard Garrett — Tue, 15 May 2012 16:30:21 +0000

You’re right, there is nothing to worry about…aside from the apparent likelihood that highly technical fracturing jobs are being performed by 19 year olds, and that the ‘thick’ pipe you mention might not be thick enough, and that up to 1200 truck trips* are required to haul all of the water and supplies to every fracturing site, and that upwards of a million gallons of contaminated fluid need to be treated and thrown away (remembering, there is no away), and that a Duke University study found conclusive evidence of groundwater contamination by methane in the Marcellus Shale play.
For my self and to serve my responsibility to future generations, I want to know what all of this looks like and make a mindful decision about where my energy comes from and how I use it. So I definitely want to know where/what the ‘pea’ is and where it will end up. By the way, apparently many of the trade secret formulations used in hydraulic fracturing that are hidden by rule from public scrutiny by the Wyoming Oil and Gas Commission are radioactive. Perhaps you were closer to the truth than you glibly imagined.

*P.S. today, the NY Times reports that it is on the truck trips that workers are most likely to be injured or killed, not on the rigs themselves (your hijinks notwithstanding).

Comment on Industry’s fracking problem by Inky

Inky — Mon, 14 May 2012 15:26:28 +0000

Several points:
Fracking is ubiquitous — some 90 percent of all oil and gas operations involve fracking, sometimes just to lube the works and get fluids and gases to flow easier.
When performed 100 percent accurately, fracking is safe.
Fallible human beings are doing fracking.
There’s no such thing as 100 percent safe.
So is society willing to trade temporary financial benefits for permanent water contamination?

Comment on Industry’s fracking problem by ReddMann

ReddMann — Mon, 14 May 2012 02:00:00 +0000

I agree with most of what you wrote -but what gov. mead forgets is that the federal lands in the state of Wyoming belong to all us in this country and without Federal regulations and oversight there will continue to be mishaps such as Pavillion and the most recent blowout at Douglas. So what if it takes a little longer to get all the proper paperwork done properly to ensure that we are not endangering the health of the people of this great state,and also to make sure they (the industry) don’t ruin the majestic landscape and beauty of this state. Thank You Mr. Thomas S. Redding