The EPA has actual data... water samples with test results containing contaminates... Not an OPINION POLL

Quoted from 55tbird

All  I can say is people near fracking sites who can light their tap water on fire IS compelling...

There have been cases of people being able to light fire to tap water --- from wells long BEFORE fracking existed and  FAR AWAY from any area that fracking was going on.  

The process of drilling a well for water --- allows for the potential to natural gas or other flammable gasses to come in contact with tap water --- and that is NOT because of fracking.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

There have been cases of people being able to light fire to tap water --- from wells long BEFORE fracking existed and  FAR AWAY from any area that fracking was going on.  

The process of drilling a well for water --- allows for the potential to natural gas or other flammable gasses to come in contact with tap water --- and that is NOT because of fracking.

How about the ones who NEVER smelled gas in their water or could NEVER light their kitchen sink on fire UNTIL the frackers came to town? Just coincidence? or just a big greenie conspiracy like Love Canal?

I am not against fracking as long as it is done safely and some distance away from anyone's drinking water. There are safe methods to use when fracking and these methods should be followed everywhere to prevent injecting toxins into drinking water.

Quoted from 55tbird

How about the ones who NEVER smelled gas in their water or could NEVER light their kitchen sink on fire UNTIL the frackers came to town? Just coincidence? or just a big greenie conspiracy like Love Canal?

I don't believe that Love Canal was a "greenie conspiracy"  and I don't believe that it has been conclusively proven that the fracking techniques proposed to be used in New York State have ever contaminated drinking water or caused drinking water to be able to be lit on fire.

I would need to see an actual report .. with conclusive evidence ... and not just a video that is floating around the internet ---- sorry .. I am NOT changing my position on fracking just because of some video or the unsubstantiated misgivings of some opponents.

Quoted from Shadow

I am not against fracking as long as it is done safely and some distance away from anyone's drinking water. There are safe methods to use when fracking and these methods should be followed everywhere to prevent injecting toxins into drinking water.

Shadow,
The distance away from a home water well is deceiving.  Fracking drills a hole straight down, but then turns 90degrees and drills horizontally to access the gas.  

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

There have been cases of people being able to light fire to tap water --- from wells long BEFORE fracking existed and  FAR AWAY from any area that fracking was going on.  

The process of drilling a well for water --- allows for the potential to natural gas or other flammable gasses to come in contact with tap water --- and that is NOT because of fracking.

It's interesting that the EPA might be the lead agency to discover gas in water wells, and you discount any report
by the EPA.  

Officials in Three States Pin Water Woes on Gas Drilling:
http://www.propublica.org/article/officials-in-three-states-pin-water-woes-on-gas-drilling-426

You can create a problem with someones drinking water by drilling a water well, polluting the ground water, letting leach-ate from a dump drain into water supplies, or any digging which affects the water table. There are safe ways of fracking  natural gas and it should be implemented across the country. As far as how far away from a water supply they need to be before drilling a well to be used for fracking has to be determined and followed to keep drinking water supplies safe and clean.

Quoted from Box A Rox

It's interesting that the EPA might be the lead agency to discover gas in water wells, and you discount any report
by the EPA.  

Officials in Three States Pin Water Woes on Gas Drilling:
http://www.propublica.org/article/officials-in-three-states-pin-water-woes-on-gas-drilling-426

The EPA has a track record of bad reports -- like the one that claimed that dredging PCBs was the safest option ---    I remain EXTREMELY skeptical of any report from the EPA because of its poor track record.

Quoted from Box A Rox

IMO, the real question is... how do we SAFELY extract this resource from the ground with out poisoning our water supply.

let the Chinese do it

cant we 'frack' cow manure?

Four years ago, Barack Obama pledged to promote a green revolution, saying the government would back alternative-energy technologies that could create 5 million jobs and free the U.S. from a dependence on overseas oil tyrants.

Today, the energy industry is one of the main engines of job growth and the U.S. is the closest it has been in almost 20 years to meeting its own needs. Yet the transformation -- driven by a surge in oil and natural gas production -- isn’t primarily green and has little connection to the president’s plans.

“We’re moving to energy independence by accident,” said Philip Verleger, who directed the U.S. Treasury office of energy policy under President Jimmy Carter and is now an industry consultant. “Energy policy had nothing to do with it.”

The boom in oil and natural gas is setting up an election- year irony: a green-energy president who is getting a boost from fossil fuels.

Oil and natural gas output is on the rise largely because of hydraulic fracturing, which has given drillers access to reserves in shale rock formations once too costly to produce. The so-called fracking injects millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals thousands of feet below the surface to free fossil fuels trapped there, a process that Obama’s environmentalist allies say increases air and water pollution.

Fracking is unlocking oil in North Dakota and Texas. More important to Obama’s re-election chances, it’s aiding natural gas production -- and Obama’s poll ratings -- in Ohio and Pennsylvania, swing states with 38 electoral votes combined.
Job Growth

Ohio’s unemployment rate was 7.2 percent in July, the lowest since September 2008 and below the nationwide 8.3 percent. Job growth there is the fourth-fastest in the U.S., federal data show. Pennsylvania’s jobless rate is 7.9 percent, down from a high of 8.7 percent in March 2010.

The president has done little to stall the expansion of fracking, even with pressure from within his Democratic Party.

“There’s so many different ways in which this is feeding into various sectors of the economy,” said Philip Sharp, a former Democratic House member from Indiana who heads Resources for the Future, a Washington-based environmental research group. “The administration looks to me like they’ve come to recognize its importance and they have not jumped on the anti-fracking bandwagon.”

Different Vision

When he entered the White House, Obama offered a different vision for the U.S.’s energy future, vowing to revive an economy battered by a recession and mend the environment with an export- heavy, green-technology push.

As a candidate in 2008, Obama had promised to create 5 million green jobs over 10 years by investing in solar, wind and other renewable energy sources. His 2009 economic-stimulus plan spent a record $90 billion on clean energy.

Among the successes the administration can tout are a doubling of solar and wind-energy generation and the retrofitting of more than 1 million homes to lower heating and cooling costs. An agreement with automakers to raise fleet-wide fuel economy will cut carbon emissions and oil imports.

Still, only 225,000 green jobs had materialized through the stimulus program by 2010, according to the White House.

Green energy “is a big area of unfulfilled promise,” said Julian Zelizer, a history and public affairs professor at Princeton University in New Jersey.

http://www.businessweek.com/ne.....obama-in-swing-state

To Quote Rusty in one of today's posts:
"An interview in January?  Try more currenty (Sunday) (ya know, the present)"

Yet in this post:
"Still, only 225,000 green jobs had materialized through the stimulus program by 2010"

Being "current" only applies to others, not to himself.  

Quoted from Box A Rox

To Quote Rusty in one of today's posts:
"An interview in January?  Try more currenty (Sunday) (ya know, the present)"

Yet in this post:
"Still, only 225,000 green jobs had materialized through the stimulus program by 2010"

Being "current" only applies to others, not to himself.  

I read articles dated  September 04, 2012, not 2008 ... these are the latest numbers for this industry.  Talk to your buddy and his administration, not me.