|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jul 1, 2012 18:09:11 GMT
tribixler, I was just correcting the data from the link you provided. It would be a stretch to say that that Mr. Obama's admin is the cause of the increase.
But I think it is also a stretch to blame the decrease in oil production on the EPA. Hubbert pretty much predicted the decline in 1956, long before the EPA was created.
|
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Jul 3, 2012 16:26:00 GMT
tribixler, your using old data. U.S. oil production has been up the last last three years in a row. Which oddly enough are [in spite of] the first 3 years of the Obama administration. 2009 5,360.54 8.29 % 2010 5,474.35 2.12 % 2011 5,672.56 3.62 % Fixed. I'm still waiting for the list of oil exploration and production promoted by Obama, who just recently characterized oil as the "fuel of the past". But now it is election time, and he is suddenly the Oil King. BTW, Hubbert also predicted peak NG. Add his name to the ash heap of history. The same will be true for oil, unless we allow kooks in the EPA/government dictate our future. You honestly believe if Obama is re-elected, he'll continue his charade of supporting increasing oil production? Such naivety. toptrends.nowandnext.com/2010/12/02/timeline-of-failed-predictions/I don't recall the source, so you'll just have to trust me.  |
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jul 4, 2012 1:07:41 GMT
magellan, nobody with any knowledge ever claimed Mr. Obama to be the "Oil King". My only claim is that he is not the "oil boogie man" you make him out to be. I back that statement up with production facts. The fact is oil production has increased under his tenure as has NG.
I will also remind you that Hubbert had no way of predicting increased production do to technological advances. His curve is still valid but the decline will not be as steep. We will still have oil for centuries it will just cost much more as it becomes rarer.
You can't have it both ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jul 4, 2012 2:22:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jul 4, 2012 4:24:23 GMT
When it comes to natural gas, Obama can’t win 15 Short URL URL Close Email Print The past several weeks have demonstrated the love-hate relationship with industry. | AP Photo Close By DAN BERMAN | 5/16/12 10:57 PM EDT President Barack Obama talked up natural gas in his State of the Union address, his top aides have held dozens of meetings with natural gas industry leaders and his administration has given the industry what it wanted on two big regulatory issues. Read more: www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76402.html#ixzz1zd05oa9J |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jul 4, 2012 11:50:12 GMT
glenn:
On the radio yesterday there was an interview with a fellow involved in fracking rules. He stated that he, (us north dakota) have been talking to the EPA concerning fracking rules. The EPA wants to try to run roughshod over ND, and he stated that if the EPA comes with stupid, the state will take EPA to court again.
|
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jul 4, 2012 12:56:38 GMT
Where is the data? We get breathless photos of melting and drilling and etc. but where is the taxpayer's data? AGW hand wringing and prophet (profiting) of doom. Take a trip spend the money yes they do. Research well not so much. "Lonnie and Ellen, A Serial Non-Archiving Couple" Hi resolution archived data set?  "While Lonnie Thompson has been a frequent example at Climate Audit of a serial non-archiver, it turns out that Ellen Mosley-Thompson is even worse. She has spent her entire career in the ice core business> According to her CV, she has led “nine expeditions to Antarctica and six to Greenland to retrieve ice cores”. However, a search of the NOAA paleo archive for data archived by Ellen Mosley-Thompson shows only one data set from Antarctica or Greenland associated with her. Lest this example be taken to mar her otherwise unblemished record of non-archiving, the data was published in 1981 while she was still junior and, according to its readme, it was transcribed by a third party and contributed in her name. I believe that it’s fair that she has not archived at NOAA (or, to my knowledge, elsewhere) any data from the “nine expeditions to Antarctica and six to Greenland”. Mosley-Thompson has had an important leadership role in the U.S. PARCA program (Program for Regional Arctic Climate Assessment), which drilled 49 short and medium-length cores in Greeenland between 1995 and 1998. She was senior author of a summary article in 2001 – see here. Despite the importance of d18O as a climate proxy and the promised benefits of the PARCA Program for Regional Arctic Climate Assessment, not a single d18O measurement from the PARCA program has been archived at the NOAA paleoclimate archive nor, to my knowledge and I’ve looked very carefully, elsewhere. Squiggles for 6 of Mrs Lonnie’s Greenland cores (5 PARCA and one 1989 core) and 3 of her Antarctic cores (dating back to the early 1990s) were shown in a 2006 article. None of this data has been archived. " climateaudit.org/2012/07/01/lonnie-and-ellen-serial-non-archivers/ |
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jul 4, 2012 13:16:44 GMT
sigurdur, do you or this fellow involved in the fracking rules from ND have any idea what chemicals they are using in the fracking process? I will tell you this, there are hundreds of different chemicals and the fracking companies have been protective of just what they are using and how much.
I am all for responsible drilling and I think for the most part fracking is safe. However, since the water tables belong to everyone it should be common knowledge just what they are pumping down there to frack these wells. Their "proprietary" claims on just what they are using in their magic cocktails should be public knowledge.
I have been on locations where they are fracking and have seen the names of chemicals.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jul 4, 2012 13:27:42 GMT
sigurdur here is a partial list of some of the chemicals used. I can assure you they use worse. How would you like some of these to end up in your aquifer due to a bad cement job because some company man with a 3rd grade education decides to save a buck? As you know I work in the oil and gas industry and my biggest fear is an aquifer contaminated due to negligence that would have a very negative effect on my income and ability to take care of my family.
As previously noted, chemicals perform many functions in a hydraulic fracturing job. Although there are dozens to hundreds of chemicals which could be used as additives, there are a limited number which are routinely used in hydraulic fracturing. The following is a list of the chemicals used most often. This chart is sorted alphabetically by the Product Function to make it easier for you to compare to the fracturing records .
Chemical Name CAS Chemical Purpose Product Function
Hydrochloric Acid 007647-01-0 Helps dissolve minerals and initiate cracks in the rock Acid
Glutaraldehyde 000111-30-8 Eliminates bacteria in the water that produces corrosive by-products Biocide
Quaternary Ammonium Chloride 012125-02-9 Eliminates bacteria in the water that produces corrosive by-products Biocide
Quaternary Ammonium Chloride 061789-71-1 Eliminates bacteria in the water that produces corrosive by-products Biocide
Tetrakis Hydroxymethyl-Phosphonium Sulfate 055566-30-8 Eliminates bacteria in the water that produces corrosive by-products Biocide
Ammonium Persulfate 007727-54-0 Allows a delayed break down of the gel Breaker
Sodium Chloride 007647-14-5 Product Stabilizer Breaker
Magnesium Peroxide 014452-57-4 Allows a delayed break down the gel Breaker
Magnesium Oxide 001309-48-4 Allows a delayed break down the gel Breaker
Calcium Chloride 010043-52-4 Product Stabilizer Breaker
Choline Chloride 000067-48-1 Prevents clays from swelling or shifting Clay Stabilizer
Tetramethyl ammonium chloride 000075-57-0 Prevents clays from swelling or shifting Clay Stabilizer
Sodium Chloride 007647-14-5 Prevents clays from swelling or shifting Clay Stabilizer
Isopropanol 000067-63-0 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent Corrosion Inhibitor
Methanol 000067-56-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent Corrosion Inhibitor
Formic Acid 000064-18-6 Prevents the corrosion of the pipe Corrosion Inhibitor
Acetaldehyde 000075-07-0 Prevents the corrosion of the pipe Corrosion Inhibitor
Petroleum Distillate 064741-85-1 Carrier fluid for borate or zirconate crosslinker Crosslinker
Hydrotreated Light Petroleum Distillate 064742-47-8 Carrier fluid for borate or zirconate crosslinker Crosslinker
Potassium Metaborate 013709-94-9 Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases Crosslinker
Triethanolamine Zirconate 101033-44-7 Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases Crosslinker
Sodium Tetraborate 001303-96-4 Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases Crosslinker
Boric Acid 001333-73-9 Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases Crosslinker
Zirconium Complex 113184-20-6 Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases Crosslinker
Borate Salts N/A Maintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases Crosslinker
Ethylene Glycol 000107-21-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Crosslinker
Methanol 000067-56-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Crosslinker
Polyacrylamide 009003-05-8 “Slicks” the water to minimize friction Friction Reducer
Petroleum Distillate 064741-85-1 Carrier fluid for polyacrylamide friction reducer Friction Reducer
Hydrotreated Light Petroleum Distillate 064742-47-8 Carrier fluid for polyacrylamide friction reducer Friction Reducer
Methanol 000067-56-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Friction Reducer
Ethylene Glycol 000107-21-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Friction Reducer
Guar Gum 009000-30-0 Thickens the water in order to suspend the sand Gelling Agent
Petroleum Distillate 064741-85-1 Carrier fluid for guar gum in liquid gels Gelling Agent
Hydrotreated Light Petroleum Distillate 064742-47-8 Carrier fluid for guar gum in liquid gels Gelling Agent
Methanol 000067-56-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Gelling Agent
Polysaccharide Blend 068130-15-4 Thickens the water in order to suspend the sand Gelling Agent
Ethylene Glycol 000107-21-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Gelling Agent
Citric Acid 000077-92-9 Prevents precipitation of metal oxides Iron Control
Acetic Acid 000064-19-7 Prevents precipitation of metal oxides Iron Control
Thioglycolic Acid 000068-11-1 Prevents precipitation of metal oxides Iron Control
Sodium Erythorbate 006381-77-7 Prevents precipitation of metal oxides Iron Control
Lauryl Sulfate 000151-21-3 Used to prevent the formation of emulsions in the fracture fluid Non-Emulsifier
Isopropanol 000067-63-0 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Non-Emulsifier
Ethylene Glycol 000107-21-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Non-Emulsifier
Sodium Hydroxide 001310-73-2 Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers pH Adjusting Agent
Potassium Hydroxide 001310-58-3 Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers pH Adjusting Agent
Acetic Acid 000064-19-7 Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers pH Adjusting Agent
Sodium Carbonate 000497-19-8 Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers pH Adjusting Agent
Potassium Carbonate 000584-08-7 Adjusts the pH of fluid to maintains the effectiveness of other components, such as crosslinkers pH Adjusting Agent
Copolymer of Acrylamide and Sodium Acrylate 025987-30-8 Prevents scale deposits in the pipe Scale Inhibitor
Sodium Polycarboxylate N/A Prevents scale deposits in the pipe Scale Inhibitor
Phosphonic Acid Salt N/A Prevents scale deposits in the pipe Scale Inhibitor
Lauryl Sulfate 000151-21-3 Used to increase the viscosity of the fracture fluid Surfactant
Ethanol 000064-17-5 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Surfactant
Naphthalene 000091-20-3 Carrier fluid for the active surfactant ingredients Surfactant
Methanol 000067-56-1 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Surfactant
Isopropyl Alcohol 000067-63-0 Product stabilizer and / or winterizing agent. Surfactant
2-Butoxyethanol 000111-76-2 Product stabilizer Surfactant
One of the problems associated with identifying chemicals is that some chemicals have multiple names. For example Ethylene Glycol (Antifreeze) is also known by the names Ethylene alcohol; Glycol; Glycol alcohol; Lutrol 9; Macrogol 400 BPC; Monoethylene glycol; Ramp; Tescol; 1,2-Dihydroxyethane; 2-Hydroxyethanol; HOCH2CH2OH; Dihydroxyethane; Ethanediol; Ethylene gycol; Glygen; Athylenglykol; Ethane-1,2-diol; Fridex; M.e.g.; 1,2-Ethandiol; Ucar 17; Dowtherm SR 1; Norkool; Zerex; Aliphatic diol; Ilexan E; Ethane-1,2-diol 1,2-Ethanedio.
This multiplicity of names can make a search for chemicals somewhat difficult and frustrating. However, if you search for a chemical by the CAS number it will return the correct chemical even if the name on the fracturing record does not match. For example if the fracturing record listed the chemical Hydrogen chloride and you searched for it by name using a chemical search site you may not get a result. But if you search for CAS # 007647-01-0 it might return Hydrochloric acid which is another name of Hydrogen chloride. Therefore, by using the CAS number you can avoid the issue of multiple names for the same chemical.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jul 4, 2012 13:29:28 GMT
That was a copy and paste from a google search not my own writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jul 8, 2012 3:04:18 GMT
We have to adjust stupid at times. Is this one of those times? The NGS on Navajo land in northern Arizona burns coal from the Kayenta Mine, which is co-owned by the Navajo and Hopi nations. The EPA is pondering whether all three units of the NGS should be required to install the “best available” emission-control technologies, perhaps costing more than $1.1 billion. More than 80 percent of the power plant’s employees are Navajo, many of whom speak Navajo to help preserve the nation’s culture. In 2007, the percentage of the Navajo Nation’s population living in poverty was 36.8. hotair.com/headlines/archives/2012/07/07/clean-air-at-what-cost/comment-page-1/ |
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jul 8, 2012 22:19:40 GMT
magellan, nobody with any knowledge ever claimed Mr. Obama to be the "Oil King". My only claim is that he is not the "oil boogie man" you make him out to be. I back that statement up with production facts. The fact is oil production has increased under his tenure as has NG. I will also remind you that Hubbert had no way of predicting increased production do to technological advances. His curve is still valid but the decline will not be as steep. We will still have oil for centuries it will just cost much more as it becomes rarer. You can't have it both ways. Fuel prices have fluctuated forever, but its incorrect to say they are getting more expensive and there is no evidence they will become more expensive. Sure inflation can make it cost more dollars but in constant dollar terms fuel prices have generally gone down not up. Technology is the primary vehicle for decreasing fuel prices as it is for computers or anything. It happens with such regularity one would think one could bet on it. Prices will fluctuate primarily through speculative markets. I had to laugh at the first episode of the new Dallas where JR is the evil guy who wants to drill Southfork against the wishes of Bobby who is into alternative energies and seems to want to make Southfork a ranch museum, having a near apolexy when he sees oil tankers entering the property. Yep speculation is more than market speculation its sitting on oil also. It doesn't matter if you are betting on future higher prices or conservation it has the same effect. Indeed Hubert could not speculate on technology but all that means is his predictions were never worth the paper they were written on. Hubbard is a smart guy as he obviously got somebody to pay him for nonsense. . . .he may even know its nonsense. Oil indeed can be a finite resource and never get more expensive at the same time, except maybe as nostalgia and perhaps as a rarity with little demand which demands higher markups and losses of economies of scale. As long as demand is high there is no way to predict how much will be supplied. Pessimistic folks will always put a pessimistic spin on it. Non-pessimistic folks tend to properly prioritize the situation. Its like global warming. . . .its getting warmer, ice is melting. . . .is it something to prioritize; or is it just normal fluctuation politically exaggerated? |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jul 13, 2012 23:24:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jul 14, 2012 20:20:01 GMT
sigurdur here is a partial list of some of the chemicals used. I can assure you they use worse. How would you like some of these to end up in your aquifer due to a bad cement job because some company man with a 3rd grade education decides to save a buck? As you know I work in the oil and gas industry and my biggest fear is an aquifer contaminated due to negligence that would have a very negative effect on my income and ability to take care of my family.
Your concern is legitimate. But is your solution? There is a lot of doubt about that.
A lot of family impacts come from over exaggerating anthropogenic contributions. Safety levels are more often politically set than scientifically set.
Demanding complete disclosure of cocktails used is also anti-competitive it sets the stage for political battles that might be motivated for a whole pot pourri of reasons including by competitors.
I get an annual report on my water supply that zeros in primarily on chemicals and compounds of concern. Obviously if you are pumping potent dangerous chemicals into the ground there should be requirements for disclosure of specific chemicals of high concern or downright prohibition if the risk is too high to accept.
But where does it stop. The US government is still trying to figure where to put nukes when there is no known reason why they should be looking so hard.
Risk cannot be reduced to zero. Everything we do has some level of risk. Stuff happens. A lot of bad stuff happens; if controls were put in place to remove all the risk the net result would be more bad stuff happening than if you did nothing.
Unfortunately the degree of risk varies among people that when sufficient risk is not apparent to warrant action, risk is then exaggerated. Our political environment is at odds and almost frozen from all the lies and exaggerations about risk.
I couldn't see a single chemical on your list I should be concerned about. Heck one I take daily as a nutritional supplement and I see several others that are common food additives, not to speak of common table salt.
|
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Aug 23, 2012 11:40:35 GMT
I just felt so good getting the record straight I just had to donate. "AP Exclusive: Energy loan watchdog an Obama donor" "WASHINGTON (AP) -- A veteran Wall Street executive who performed an independent review that exonerated the Obama administration's program of loans to energy companies contributed $52,500 to re-elect President Barack Obama in the months since completing his work, according to an Associated Press review of campaign records. The executive defended the integrity of his conclusions and said he decided to donate to Obama after his work was finished." hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CAMPAIGN_OBAMA_DONOR?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE= |
|
