A Breakthrough for Hydraulic Fracturing

[thackney]

A Breakthrough for Hydraulic Fracturing
https://www.rigzone.com/news/wire/a_breakthrough_for_hydraulic_fracturing-28-sep-2018-157067-article/
September 28, 2018

A revolutionary study of groundwater quality in the Ohio Middle Ordovician Utica Shale hydraulic fracturing play provides new evidence that “fracking” operations are safe to nearby water sources.

The study found that methane concentrations in the studied water supply did not increase over a period of four years, and the methane present was from plants, not fossil fuels — even while more than two thousand new horizontal wells were drilled in the region.

Reached for comment, Professor Amy Townsend-Small, one of the study’s authors, emphasized that her study analyzed many water samples over “a long time series of fracking activity.” She added that “most studies before mine only sampled once.” In other words, this rigorous study showed that the massive expansion of hydraulic fracturing operations in the Utica Shale did not increase methane in the local water supply. Hydraulic fracturing advocates now have a new public message and legal tool to push back on restrictive litigation and legislation. 

The study was published in May 2018 in Environmental Monitoring and Assessment by scientists from the University of Cincinnati and University of California-Irvine. Its authors measured methane in water wells near drill sites, analyzing for pH, electrical conductivity, radiocarbon dating, and isotopic composition. They found that the proportion of water-borne methane attributable to a “fossil fuel derived natural gas source” did not increase as fracking operations expanded. Instead, most methane near the sites was attributable to biogenic and bacterial sources, and that remained true even as drilling increased....

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Professor Amy Townsend-Small

Target of the next lynch mob?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Digging a bit further, it appears these results have been around since 2016.

this tidbit surfaced:

After news broke that an ongoing University of Cincinnati (UC) study, which included baseline samples, has found no water contamination from hydraulic fracturing, the Times Reporter reported that the funders were “disappointed”  in the results.

This news comes after environmental groups originally praised the ongoing study, even giving the UC lead researcher Dr. Amy Townsend-Small an award for her work on the project. But as Dr. Townsend-Small said at a recent public meeting hosted by the anti-fracking Carroll County Concerned Citizens (CCCC),

“I’m really sad to say this but some of our funders, the groups that had given us funding in the past, were a little disappointed in our results. They feel that fracking is scary and so they were hoping our data could point to a reason to ban it.” (emphasis added)

https://www.energyindepth.org/new-video-anti-fossil-fuel-funders-disappointed-with-groundbreaking-study-finding-no-water-contamination-from-fracking/

Isn't it delightful when the enemy funds the studies which refute their rationale for funding?

[Smokin Joe]

The truly delightful part is that those sources of funding which had hoped for different results ended  up funding good science, and the answer to a question instead of funding some more politically skewed nonsense that would further taint scientific inquiry with junk.
In the end, if the studies conducted are of similar integrity, it enhances the ability of watchdog organizations to cry "foul" if the data and the studies done are free of political prejudice and untainted by agenda driven bias.

Recall, if we will, that when the Ecology (later "environmental") movement started, despite Soviet seed money going to some organizations to disrupt Western Industry, there were very real problems with pollution, which in some places and with some substances still happen.

Fraccing, however, is not one of these problems when conducted properly in well constructed wellbores.

[kidd]

“I’m really sad to say this but some of our funders, the groups that had given us funding in the past, were a little disappointed in our results. They feel that fracking is scary and so they were hoping our data could point to a reason to ban it.”

They fund a study to explore the 'dangers' of fracking and find out that it is safe.
Then are disappointed???

Clearly there is an unmentioned agenda.