List of 78 Chemicals Used in Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid in Pennsylvania

UPDATE (July 6): It seems the list below is not completely accurate, as admitted by the PA DEP. The list below includes chemicals and substances stored on site (like diesel fuel and oil) that are not injected into the ground. MDN will furnish an updated list when it becomes available from the DEP.

An earlier version of the list, provided by DEP to the Associated Press and published in newspapers throughout the state this week, purportedly included all of the chemicals used in Pennsylvania during the gas extraction process called hydraulic fracturing. Instead, it included not just the chemicals pumped deep underground but also those stored or used on a well site, including fuel for vehicles and brake fluid.

“You can blame it on me,” Scott Perry, the director of DEP’s Bureau of Oil and Gas Management, said on Wednesday.

The original list was a compilation of the chemicals identified on safety documents called material safety data sheets that hydraulic fracturing contractors must submit to the department, but he did not realize that it included substances the contractors use both above and below ground on a well site, he said. The second list was winnowed by a DEP chemist, who recognized that some of the chemicals on the initial list are not among those injected underground during the fracturing process.

Of the 83 chemicals on the list published by the AP and the 78 on the list posted by the DEP, only 37 items are in common.

Three compounds specifically addressed in the AP article because of the risks they can pose to human health – naphthalene, toluene and xylene – are not on the list of hydraulic fracturing chemicals DEP posted on its website on Wednesday.

Scranton Times Tribune (July 1) – DEP shale chemical lists at odds over inclusion of above ground substances

Original post from June 30…

Using Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) from drillers, along with analysis of fracking fluid, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has released an updated list of 78 chemicals they say are found in fluids used by gas drillers in PA (called “fracking fluids”). MDN has obtained the list of 78 chemicals and reproduced it below. There is also a downloadable version at the end of this posting.

There are many nasty chemicals in this list, no one disputes that. But here’s a few things to keep in mind:

  1. No one knows how much of these chemicals are being used by any given driller. We do know that fracking fluid is composed of less than one percent of the chemicals in this list, with water and sand making up the other 99 percent.
  2. When fracking fluid is pumped into the ground, the vertical hole down which it’s pumped is lined with concrete to protect surface water supplies from chemicals. The fracking fluid goes down some 5,000 feet to where it’s used to help break rock apart releasing the natural gas, and then most of the fluid is pumped back out again and carted away where it’s treated at a regulated and approved facility. For the fluid that stays behind, it’s down some 5,000 feet. That’s almost a mile of solid rock between where it sits and surface water supplies (which are located at about 300 feet). There’s no way any of that fluid will “seep up” into water supplies. And remember that most fluid is pumped back out again. So less than one percent of the fluid are chemicals from this list, and most of that comes out again, leaving behind a very very small amount of chemicals a mile below the surface and heavily diluted by water and sand.
  3. Compare the list below with the labels on the containers under your kitchen and bathroom sinks. You’ll find some of the same names on the labels.
  4. One last thing to keep in mind: No driller uses all of these chemicals. In fact, Range Resources has openly discussed what they use in their fracking fluid:

Range Resources, which uses contractor Frac Tech for its fracing work, says its frac fluid additives are chosen from a list of only nine compounds — hydrochloric acid, methanol propargyl, polyacrylamide, glutaraldehyde, ethanol, ethylene glycol, alcohol and sodium hydroxide.*

Chemicals Used in the Hydraulic Fracturing Process in Pennsylvania
Prepared by the Department of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Oil and Gas Management
Compiled from Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) obtained from Inustry

Updated June 10, 2010

Chemical Product Name
2,2-Dibromo-3-Nitrilopropionamide Bio Clear 1000/Bio Clear 2000/ Bio-Clear 200/BioRid20L/ EC6116A
2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one X-Cide 207
5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one X-Cide 207
Acetic Acid Fe-1A Acidizing Composition/ Packer Inhibitor
Acetic Anhydride Fe-1A Acidizing Composition
Acetylene GT&S Inc./ Airco
Alcohol Ethoxylated C12-16 NE-200
Alkyl benzene sulfonic acid Tetrolite AW0007/ FR-46
Ammonia (aqueous) FAW-5
Ammonium Bifluoride ABF 37%
Ammonium Persulfate AP Break
Ammonium Bisulfite Techni-Hib 604/ Fe OXCLEAR/ Packer Inhibitor
Ammonium chloride Salt Inhibitor
Ammonium Salt (alkylpolyether sulfate) Tetrolite AW0007
Amorphous silica TerraProp Plus/ Bituminous Coal Fly Ash ASTM C618
Benzoic Acid Benzoic Acid
Boric Acid BC-140/ Unilink 8.5
Boric Oxide XLW-32
Calcium Chloride Dowflake
Calcium Oxide Bituminous Coal Fly Ash ASTM C618
carboxymethylhydroxypropyl guar blend Unigel CMPHG
Choline Chloride Clay Treat-2C
Cinnamaldehyde ENVIROHIB 2001
Citric Acid Ferrotrol 300L/ IC-100L
Complex polyamine salt Clay Master-5C
Crystalline Silica: Cristobalite  
Crystalline Silica: Quartz Silica Sand/ / Atlas PRC/ Best Sand/ Bituminous Coal Fly Ash ASTM C618
Cupric chloride dihydrate Ferrotrol 280L
Cured resin LiteProp 125
Cyclohexanes CS-2
Dazomet ICI-3240
Diethylene Glycol Scaletrol 720/ Scaletrol 7208

d-Limonene

MA-844W
Enzyme GBL-8X
EO-C7-9-iso-, C8 rich-alcohols NE-940/ NE-90
EO-C9-11-iso-, C10-rich alcohols NE-940/ NE-90
Ethoxylated Alcohol FRW-14/ SAS-2/ Flomax 50/ WFR-3B
Ethyl Acetate Castle Thrust
Ethyl Alcohol FAW-5/ Castle Shop Solv/ Dallas Morris
Ethylbenzene NDL-100/ PARANOX/ Uniflo II
Ethylbenzene NDL-100/ PARANOX/ Uniflo II
Ethylene Glycol ENVIROHIB 2001/ ICA-2/ LEB 10X/ Scaletrol
720/ Sceletrol 7208/ CC 300/ Clachek A/ Clachek
LP/ Ironsta II B/ NCL-100/ BC 140/ NCL-100/
Flomax 50/ NCL/ Scalehib 100/ Unihib O/ Unilink 8.5
Formic Acid ENVIROHIB 2001
Gluconic Acid Interstate ICA-2
Glutaraldehyde Alpha 114/Alpha 125/ ICI-150
Glycerol Bio Sealers
Glycol Ethers ENVIROHIB 2001/AMPHOAM 75/ PARANOX/ Uniflo II/ Unifoam/ WNE-342LN
Guar Gum PROGUM 19 GUAR PRODUCT/ Unigel 19XL/ Benchmark Polymer 3400/ WGA-15/ Unigel 5F
Hydrochloric Acid Hydrochloric Acid (HCL)/ TETRAClean 542/ Muriatic Acid
Hydrochloric Acid 3% – 35% Hydrochloric Acid 3% – 35%
Isopropanol AFS 30 Blend/ FAC-1W/ FAC-3W/ MA-844W/ NE-23/ NE-940/ Flomax 50/ Tetrolite AW0007/
FMW25 Foamer/ CS-2
Isopropyl Alcohol NFS-102/ WFT-9511/ LT-32/ AR-1/ Flomax 50/ NDL-100/ Unibac/ Uniflo II/ Uniflo/ Unihib O/
WNE-342LN
Methanol

AFS 30 Blend/ NE-200/ Activator Superset-W/ CI-14/ FAW-5/ GasFlo/ Inflo-250W/ LT-32/ NE-940/
XLW-32/ Tetrolite AW0007/ FMW25 Foamer/ 40 HTL Corrosion Inhibitor/ NE 100/ HAI-OS Acid
Inhibitor/ Unibac/ NE-90/ Packer Inhibitor

Methyl Alcohol Clearbreak 400/ Super Surf/ Castle Shop Solv
Methyl Salicylate Bio Sealers
n-butanol AirFoam 311
Nitrilotriacetamide Salt Inhibitor
Phenolic Resin Atlas PRC
Polyethylene Glycol NE-940/ EC6116A/ NE-90
Polyethylene Glycol Mixture Bio Clear 2000/ Bio-Clear 200
Polyoxylalkylene sulfate FMW25 Foamer
Polysaccharide Blend GW-3LDF
Potassium Carbonate BF-7L
Potassium Chloride Dowflake
Potassium Hydroxide B-9, pH Increase Buffer/ BXL-2
Propargyl Alcohol CI-14/ HAI-OS Acid Inhibitor
Propylene Glycol SAS-2/ WFR-3B
Silica S-8C, Sand, 100 mesh/ Montmorillnonite clay
Sodium Bicarbonate K-34
Sodium Bromide BioRid 20L
Sodium Hydroxide Caustic Soda/ ICI-3240/ BioRid B-71
Sodium Persulphate High Perm SW-LB
Sodium Xylene Sulfonate FAC-2/ FAC-3W
Sulfuric Acid Sulfuric Acid
Surfactants AFS-30/ GasFlo/ Inflo-250W
Talc Adomite Aqua
Tetrakis(hydroxymethyl)phosphonium sulfate Magnacide 575 Microbiocide
Tetramethyl ammonium Chloride Clay Treat-3C
Trimethyloctadecylammonium chloride FAC-1W/ FAC-3W

 

Download Chemicals Used in Hydraulic Fracturing in PA list

*Pittsburgh Business Times (June 30) – DEP releases new list of frac chemicals; used in Marcellus, other Pa. operations

  • Elizabeth

    Oh, Jim, Jim, Jim, Jim, Jim….Where to begin here!?

    Please see Chesapeak’s own pdf of information on fracking (which is likely low balled as far as estimates as they normally do). It can be found here:

    http://www.chk.com/Media/MarcellusMediaKits/Marcellus_Water_Use_Fact_Sheet.pdf

    It states that 100,000 gallons of water are used to drill (this doesn’t contain fracking fluid but is a huge waste of fresh water resources) and 5.5 MILLION gallons of water to frack the well.

    Here are a few things to keep in mind:

    1. The 1% of poisons you were flaunting as a low number to have in the ground (and all over the ground, but we’ll get to that) is still very high. 1% of 5.5 MILLION gallons is still 55,000 GALLONS OF POISON PER WELL! So, you see, how we describe things and our word usage play a really big role in speaking to our audience. I’m not sure people would mind “1%” of a poisonous fluid being pumped into the ground THROUGH and under an area that their drinking water runs, but I’m pretty sure they would mind 55,000 GALLONS PER WELL of it doing the same, especially when wells can be spaced so closely around a given property.

    2. I’m sure we’ve all heard of the concrete casing problems happening with the oil disaster in the Gulf as I type this (and for 70 days before and who knows how many more after). Haliburton is the company generally responsible for the well casing technology and implementation of it in these wells, as they were with the casing in the oil well that is currently causing uncontrolled, unstoppable planet killing damage, right this minute. While Haliburton may not be responsible for cutting corners as BP is in that particular case, they are responsible to refuse to cut corners if it goes against the greater good and compromises the integrity and safety of a well. This is simply good business ethics and a responsibility to the owners of the resources they are trying to steal…er…capture ;-) When the casing is compromised, so is the entire ground structure around it. This includes the surface land, the integrity of the ground, and the water supplies that lie therein. I am really sorry if I don’t trust Haliburton to be on game at every well. It’s just not in their best interest to be, and we all know their interest is what’s important, right?

    3. Disposal of fracking fluid is dangerous business. It isn’t economically favorable to gas companies to treat this poisonous concoction, they whine about this constantly. It has to be disposed of. Deep well injection is a process in which they shove this mess back down into the ground in old, non producing wells. This practice has been banned in some Texas areas, as it is known to have caused 5 earthquakes due to the high pressure the fluid is under in the ground and fracturing that takes place in the ground structure once it’s injected. Hmmmmmm.

    4. Under the ground contamination is not the only issue with fracking fluid (or ‘production water’ as they like to call it). The poisoning of our ground water, our soil, and our air are also concerns. This water sits around and is evaporated for a period of time at many well sites (in just about all out West, but our humidity level is too high for that regular practice here). When chemicals are evaporated, they can then sit in clouds and become part of poisonous rain. This can lead to the killing of our farms and beautiful landscapes ( 100 acres of which I live on). Standing water waste can also contaminate surrounding water sources. While you purport over and over that there are no incidents of contamination, this is simply and an out and out inaccuracy. For just a couple of examples, please see the following articles:

    One example of multiple spills:
    http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_15391192

    Spills waiting to happen from irresponsible haulers:
    http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_687424.html

    I apologize that I don’t have time to find ten more articles this morning to support my claim, I thought two other sources might be enough for now.

    5. The chemicals under my kitchen sink are diluted so much that the most powerful components in the products are the ones that make theme smell pretty. I refuse to use drain cleaners and we can choose to use products that are friendly to our environment. We cannot choose the chemicals a corporation uses during their process (especially since it has been so slow in coming that we have been made privy to what they even are). We are talking about TENS OF THOUSANDS of GALLONS of pure chemicals being injected into the ground and going THROUGH the area our drinking water rests. There are only 3 homes in my square mile. The amount of our household chemical waste is easily absorbed if it’s even existent, as we are all conscious of what we want our children to be left with when we are gone and are responsible in our product use.

    Please, please, please, Jim…when reporting your Marcellus Drilling NEWS…please give all of the facts. I know it’s tedious business to actually be “fair and balanced” rather than to just say you are, but it’s good practice. Thank you for your time, and may our beautiful Landscape and Air and Water (and children) WIN!!!!!

  • http://www.meredith-coalition.org metroart

    Most of the fluid is NOT pumped back out — the NYS DEC estimates in its dSGEIS that only 9-35% comes back up. And it’s not “solid rock” — it’s filled with thousands of fissures, open fractures, faults.

    At this point, there’s NO way anyone can say that there’s NO WAY any of it will ever migrate back up into our aquifer system over a period of years, or even decades.

    As for “heavily diluted by water and sand”, the ratio is about 200:1 — the exposure limit for benzene, one of the carcinogens in fracking fluid, is 10,000,000:1.

  • Are you kidding

    1. No one knows how much of these chemicals are being used by any given driller. We do know that fracking fluid is composed of less than one percent of the chemicals in this list, with water and sand making up the other 99 percent.
    ——————————————
    This is a poorly worded and innaccurate statement. The fracking fluid is not composed of less than 1% of the chemicals on the list; the chemicals used are reportedly less than 2% of the total water/sand/chemical combination, according to the NYS sDGEIS (page 5-33). There is a big difference between what you are contending, the way you are saying it, and the reality.
    ————————
    2. When fracking fluid is pumped into the ground, the vertical hole down which it’s pumped is lined with concrete to protect surface water supplies from chemicals. The fracking fluid goes down some 5,000 feet to where it’s used to help break rock apart releasing the natural gas, and then most of the fluid is pumped back out again and carted away where it’s treated at a regulated and approved facility. For the fluid that stays behind, it’s down some 5,000 feet. That’s almost a mile of solid rock between where it sits and surface water supplies (which are located at about 300 feet). There’s no way any of that fluid will “seep up” into water supplies. And remember that most fluid is pumped back out again. So less than one percent of the fluid are chemicals from this list, and most of that comes out again, leaving behind a very very small amount of chemicals a mile below the surface and heavily diluted by water and sand.
    —————————-
    As the previous commenter said, a realtively small portion of what is pumped down is actually retrieved. It varies with each well and is dependant on many geological factors and the concientiousness of the driller in each case. Depth to shale also varies from site to site depending on specific local geological characteristics. In some cases it may be greater than 5,000 feet and in some cases it may be less than 5,000 feet. If the cement is not properly cured it can have a failure in achieving the attempt to isolate the shaft which is used to inject and retrieve as much of the fracking fluid as possible (or not). There can also be backflow preventer failures such as recently happended in Pennsylvania near the Moshannan State Forest.
    ———————————————
    3. Compare the list below with the labels on the containers under your kitchen and bathroom sinks. You’ll find some of the same names on the labels.
    ———————————————
    There are many things under my kitchen and bathroom sinks that I would not mix with water and/or choose to ingest.
    ———————————————
    4. One last thing to keep in mind: No driller uses all of these chemicals. In fact, Range Resources has openly discussed what they use in their fracking fluid.
    ———————————————
    Nobody that I know of ever even suggested that any driller uses all of the chemicals on the list at any given site at the same time. They use chemicals from the following major categories to achieve their objectives; Proppants, Acids, Breakers, Batericides/Biocides, Clay Stabilizers/Controllers, Corrosion Inhibitors, Crosslinker, Friction Reducers, Gelling Agents, Iron Controllers, Scale Inhibitors, and Surfactants (in addition to the proppants). (sDGEIS pages 5-41 and 5-42)

  • Truth be told…

    Dilution of chemicals is in the PPM range. Modern technology is now offering processes which recover up to 90% of hydraulic fracturing fluid for future use. The escape of natural gas from formations generally “forces” recovery of spent fluids, while proppants hold open fractured strata to ensure this outflow.

    Rock above target formations is relatively nonporous, or the natural gas (primarily methane, a small molecule) would escape and percolate to the surface. Well casing typically takes care of the rest.

    As for the chemicals, grab a Merck Index and the MSDS data and draw your own conclusions. There is way too much hype and far too little relevant fact being reported in mainstream media. Then there’s the Internet and all its urban legends to contend with.

  • Truth is Never Told by Industry

    Currently there is NO technology that is mandated by any state to force a driller to recover 90% of the fluid. Drillers are free to do whatever they like and leave as much frac fluid in the ground as they want. That is a problem. Especially when there are laws that govern underground injections of fluids that for some reason do not apply in this case, even though toxic fluid is being left underground.

    There is way to much hype put out by the gas industry that this process is safe-the fact remains that there is little to no “proof” that over the long term, high volume horizontal hydrofracturing in shale might pose a problem to aquifers. There is plenty of evidence though, that problems with surface pits already have contaminated the ground.

    What is also interesting is that this blog points to 78 chemicals where most other newspapers have listed 80 chemicals…why can’t this industry admit to anything straight away…must they downplay even the simplest information?

  • Pingback: Gasland Has Energy Companies on the Offensive | Marketing Endeavors

  • cdeberry

    “Truth be told… Dilution of chemicals is in the PPM range.” Which is exactly in the range (ppm to ppb) that many carcinogenic chemicals and endocrine disruptors work. As for the cement lining of the well – how many of us in SW PA have leaking through the cement walls and floors in our basements?

  • science

    From my personal experience working in the Hazardous Waste Management Industry, “Best Disposal Practices” didn’t prevail- cheapest options did. One such cheap/ worse option, for certain waste streams, was “Deep Well Injection”- as referenced above as “Hydraulic Fracturing”…
    To my knowledge the only facilities in North America that practice this method for toxic waste disposal are in Canada… profiling waste streams for this kind of disposal method was one of many reasons why I left the field… I do not feel good about this practice at all, no long term effects known- only been used since 1949 in Industry!

  • http://eco-enviro.com Erven Tallman

    WITH AN APPROVED EPA REGTISTRATION NUMBWER FOR OIL & GAS a BIOCIDE FOR FRACKING.. LIQUID . WHAT IS THE ROYALTY PAYMENT SCHEDULE ? FOR A NON TOXIC BIOGRADABLE FRACKING LIQUID ?
    ANY SIMILAR OR COMPRABLE FRACKING CHEMICAL LIQUIDS ?OLEASE ADVISE …

    ROYALTY [ LICENSING OF A NON TOXIC FRACKING LIQUID.
    THABNKS

    ERVEN TALLMAN PARTNER
    ENVIROCLEANSE LLC.
    CELL 303 905 3299

  • cleanngreen

    Whats crazy is that there is a environmentally friendly way to do the whole process its just not being used!! Ecopshere technologies, which is a company out of Stuart Florida, has patented ozonix technology that uses no chemicals when fracturing at a well site. It seems crazy to me that one of there units isn’t on every well site around the world. All these skull and cross bone chemicals that are being pumped beneath the earths surface are completely unnecessary and these guys have proved it. Check out there website, it does a great job explaining their process and how it works. Finally there is a SOLUTION!! http://www.ecospheretech.com/

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Feb 20, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: ENERGY & THE ENVIRONMENT: Oscar-nominated documentary highlights the drawbacks to natural-gas drilling « The Conservation Report

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Feb 27, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Mar 13, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Mar 20, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Mar 27, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Apr 24, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – May 8, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – May 15, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: The City of Morgantown » Blog Archive » Marcellus Gas Wells Move in Near Morgantown’s Water Supply.

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Jun 5, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: Amid Natural Gas Fracking Moratorium Exxon Grabs Share of Delaware River Watershed

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Jul 3, 2011 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Sept 25, 2011: Vandalism at Drilling Sites | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Nov 6, 2011: Should PA Tax Gas Drilling? | RefineryNews.com

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Dec 4, 2011: Should Renewable Energy be Required? | RefineryNews.com

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Dec 18, 2011: Who are you? | RefineryNews.com

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update: 2011 in Review, Looking Ahead to 2012 | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update: 2011 in Review, Looking Ahead to 2012 | RefineryNews.com

  • Pingback: What’s The Big Fracking Deal? | the college conservative

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RFKSIU5OWT2RF6RAM6TPQHFTZU Huldah

    might as well drill for oil IMHO

  • Anonymous

    To be fair, ‘if’ the fluid did migrate up it would be very diluted as well.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe going back to comment moderation isn’t such a bad idea, Jim. :)

  • http://marcellusdrilling.com Jim Willis

    Yeah, I may have to.

  • Anonymous

     First I would ask are any of you that have commented a Chemist or Chemical Engineer? Second, do you actually believe whats stated by the media or some person that enjoys smoking pot, runs nude through the woods and worships the moon? Third, do you realize that everything that you purchase, walk on, ride in, brush your teeth with, wear, eat with, etc. (I do not have enough time to expand such a broad subject) involves chemical manufacturing, and chemical processing. The entire busy world with comfortable lives and what you all enjoy and take for granted each day involves chemistry even the lap top that I am typing on including the phone that I have in my pocket I guess you would be greatly surprised comes from yes you know it Gas and Crude Oil; however, I guess after having said that of course you would be glad to give up your computers, mobile phones and IPads. Do you actually see how fear can dictate what you will and will not do? I am a Chemical Engineer and Chemist and have been working in the chemical industry for 25 years. I will not deny that there are some Green advancements that need to occur but what is being projected by the media, mother earth society and strange religious earth cults is completely and totally false. So many people believe every comment made by the mother of all F… ups the TV. They get paid to impose fear the more you fear the more you watch and purchase the very products that are produced by chemicals, ironic isn’t it? Lets go back to the year 2000 what can anyone say about Y2K do I need to say more but during that time the media sold you on the FACT that life was coming to an end on Dec. 31, right? Now this is the year 2012, are you still alive? Find out for yourselves, stop believing the very people who profit from your fear.
    Most chemicals are extracted from the very earth that you say is being destroyed such as potassium chloride, potassium hydroxide, sulfuric acid; oh by the way, do any of you know what Ethanol is? Its a very bad, bad, bad chemical hazardous to the environment right? Well you will be happy to know that if you drink scotch, tequila, vodka, beer, etc. then there is no longer a need to be concerned Ethanol is BOOZ. Acetic acid is another very bad, bad, bad chemical, right? You again will be happy to know that it is VINEGAR. The gel that is being pumped down the hole during a FRAC is the same product that is used in ice cream, butter, candy; can you see how absurd this is? Let me proceed on to the surfactants and non-emulsifiers which are the same chemicals that you wash your hair.
    I can go on and on and on but surely you can find this out for yourself. You hear something and pass it on with false knowledge or political opinion, stop it. Come to know the truth, find it out, look for yourself!  

  • Pingback: EPA’s Dimock, PA Water Test Results Show No Contamination | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: MDN Weekly Update – Apr 1, 2012: Waterless Fracking | Marcellus Drilling News

  • Pingback: Save It! » OVEC Blog

  • Pingback: 800-Ton Steel Roof Raised By Electric Fans Blowing Air, As Massive Australian LNG Project Proceeds | PlanetSave

  • Pingback: Pennsylvania and Natural Gas: A Match Made in Heaven | Glacial Energy Blog - Commercial Electric Savings, Electric Provider, Electric Supplier

  • M. Bird

    The cement used in construction is a lower grade cement than what is used in the oil and gas industry. The cement pumped down hole has way higher quality control standards it has to pass than what is used in your basement.

  • Pingback: MANIFIESTO DE LA PLATAFORMA JÓDAR LIBRE DE FRACKING | sosfrackingjaen

  • wfraser11

    Misleading in the original letter as follows.
    If there are vertical faults off fractures, tracking fluid can migrate upwards from depth. If the pipe or cement in an injector well is not secure, fluid can leak off into the
    aquifer. Both risks are not mentioned in the original note.
    Finally, besides the massive amounts of whiter used in tracking, we haven’t really been told where the used fluid goes or how its treated. Moreover, the heavy truck traffic and potential for surface spills, the surface damage and contamination, massive amounts of diesel fuel used to power the compressors for the tracking fluid are not discussed, or the effects of the original drilling, mud pits, potential for accidents or blow outs, the surface gas flares and “show” oil in the pits, etc etc etc are not discussed. Oil drilling by its very nature is an industrial and sometimes very very dirty business which deals with many fluids and gases not conducive to biologic life at the earth’s surface.
    So, lets be real here guys. Drilling and tracking are dirty, noisy, expensive and destructive to surface road and infrastructure subsystems in both rural and urban areas.

  • Pingback: List of 78 Chemicals Used in Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid in ... | NOFrack.co

  • Dana Johnson

    Your information completely contradicts the list of chemicals known to be used. Also the chemistry is not diluted, it is concentrated in places, and then can be said to be ‘confined’ when it does not further transition upward. Recent research shows water travels in faults for miles downward and can travel upward as well. The pressures ‘down there’ cause oil and gas to rise, and percolation does happen at places.
    The burden should be with investigation and public oversight and local decision-making processes, as well as scientific research only, not placation with simple denial.
    Earthquakes are on the rise where fracking is becoming common in some locales (Oklahoma), and the two occurrences correlate generally, even specifically. Faulting allows transport of liquids in unknown faults, and unknown faults are common.
    Methanol is not Ethanol.
    Both you and industry have never given me anything ‘free’ as yet.

Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.