01-01-2017, 02:10 PM
(01-01-2017, 05:55 AM)Stewy Wrote: 1 - I conceded this, but you'll find that the majority of the press is from Oklahoma because I googled it myself.
2 - Most wells........not even close. Areas of Texas, California, Alaska and Appalachia (and more) have as much or far greater well density with frac'ing compared to Oklahoma. It actually makes plenty of sense if you accept it's a geologic issue unique to Oklahoma, and not the fault of the practice itself. Thus accepting frac'ing isn't the boogey man, but frac'ing in particular Oklahoma geology.
3 - You're wrong. Comparing frac'ing to smoking is ignorance, because all humans are physiologically the same to a 99.9% accuracy. Geology from basin to basin varies dramatically for reasons you'll never take the time to understand. Geologic time, depositional history, structural history, unroofing, erosion, denudation, reservoir type, total depth, thermal history and many more factors vary from basin to basin and change how rocks react to external stimuli like frac'ing or other completion techniques.
Spare me the "I'm an expert. You wouldn't understand." bullshit.
You oil industry geologist who claim you are experts are the same ones who just caused a 900% increase in earthquakes in Oklahoma. And you are the same experts who tried to deny that there was any connection to the earthquakes and frac'ing for a long time. If you are so smart and fully understand the consequences of frac'ing then why did that happen? Why did you dent the connection? And why should we believe anything else you say about how safe frac'ing is?
The fact that nothing terrible has happened YET, proves nothing. Is it safe to smoke all the way up to the point where you develop heart or lung disease?
