All industrial activity that poisons drinking water should be banned

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

It's amazing how so many have bought into the scare of fracking without any knowledge of the industry or any before and after tests.

I mean, how hard is it to find out where they're going to be fracking for the first time (it's on the permit record) and test the wells before the drilling begins and at different intervals of time afterwards?!  wouldn't that quickly decide the issue one way or another?

...or maybe the media and environmental groups have commissioned such tests and decided not to publish the results because the results didn't agree with their position...

stop being a bunch of rubes, people...this is about CO2, not contamination of well water

[Verily]

It's amazing how so many have bought into the scare of fracking without any knowledge of the industry or any before and after tests.

I mean, how hard is it to find out where they're going to be fracking for the first time (it's on the permit record) and test the wells before the drilling begins and at different intervals of time afterwards?!  wouldn't that quickly decide the issue one way or another?

...or maybe the media and environmental groups have commissioned such tests and decided not to publish the results because the results didn't agree with their position...

stop being a bunch of rubes, people...this is about CO2, not contamination of well water

Once the contamination has happened, you can't go back. Wells take hundreds or thousands of years to clean themselves out. If you discovered that the water was poisoned quickly, well, better than not discovering it until people start to get sick, but you've just destroyed a large portion of the public water supply.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

It's amazing how so many have bought into the scare of fracking without any knowledge of the industry or any before and after tests.

I mean, how hard is it to find out where they're going to be fracking for the first time (it's on the permit record) and test the wells before the drilling begins and at different intervals of time afterwards?!  wouldn't that quickly decide the issue one way or another?

...or maybe the media and environmental groups have commissioned such tests and decided not to publish the results because the results didn't agree with their position...

stop being a bunch of rubes, people...this is about CO2, not contamination of well water

Once the contamination has happened, you can't go back. Wells take hundreds or thousands of years to clean themselves out. If you discovered that the water was poisoned quickly, well, better than not discovering it until people start to get sick, but you've just destroyed a large portion of the public water supply.

i think the concept of BEFORE and after tests is somehow beyond your comprehensionl..an ignorance the media fear mongers are counting on to sell their wares

[MaxQue]

The Duke study is pretty clear.

Water in a mile radius of a shale shaft has around 20 more times methanol than water outside of that radius.

And that is methanol who came from shale, for sure, because there is isotopic differences between shale methane and usual methane.

The question than Duke scientists wasn't able to answer is "how methane got there?". They had three hypothetises.

1. Brine used to extract shale migred through the rock.
2. Fracking caused cracks in the rock.

According to experts, both are unlikely.

3. Cracks in the cement of the casing. It already happened, we have two documented cases in Quebec of that happening.

In fact, using Quebec statistics gave by the corporations, 19 leaks were detected.

And before-after studies are done in Quebec by the corporations, but they say can't be published because "it could affect house prices if water if contaminated". Which is pretty much an admission than some water is contamined.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

3. Cracks in the cement of the casing. It already happened, we have two documented cases in Quebec of that happening.

now that is a possiblity if the cement job was poorly done (just like the BP blowout in the Gulf)...but should be fixable and therefore the methane levels in the water should subside once the casing is fixed.

...but if the casing is leaking, shouldn't that be detectable around the gas well?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

1. Brine used to extract shale migred through the rock.
2. Fracking caused cracks in the rock.

According to experts, both are unlikely.

more than just unlikely...dont know if there has ever been a case of it.  I used to study fracking and dimensions of the fractures created.  

anyone wanting to read my paper can google SPE 27381 or ISBN 978-1-55563-477-3

[MaxQue]

3. Cracks in the cement of the casing. It already happened, we have two documented cases in Quebec of that happening.

now that is a possiblity if the cement job was poorly done (just like the BP blowout in the Gulf)...but should be fixable and therefore the methane levels in the water should subside once the casing is fixed.

...but if the casing is leaking, shouldn't that be detectable around the gas well?

Depends where is the leak, I suppose. If there is a fracture in the underground part of the casing, not sure it would be obvious to see.

For case 1 and 2, it doesn't take much knowledge to know than this rock is very hard and very unlikely to fissure. The only case where I can see that happen is an earthquake, but I suppose than there is no shale in sysmic zones since the rock is fragilised.