Marcellu ShaleEssay Preview: Marcellu ShaleReport this essayMarcellus ShaleWhat is the Marcellus Shale you ask? What are some advantages and disadvantages of this operation? The Marcellus Shale is a geological formation formed by the accumulation of sediment into a sea. Over time the sediment compresses to produce an organic-rich black shale. Shale is a fine-grained sedimentary rock. Drilling into formations like the Marcellus Shale has been around since the Civil War. The process involves a key element called hydraulic fracturing, which involves injecting water and sand into a formation to help natural gas flow up a well. But we must be wary about possible chemicals that can disperse during and after this operation. Fracturing can lead to bromide in water and other compounds that are highly toxic. The Environmental Protection Agency has started a study of these chemicals that can be released, but isnt going to be completed until the fourth quarter of next year. Some may ask why dont we wait until the results of the study are released. On the bright side of hydraulic fracturing is that without fracturing there would be little or no on-shore oil or gas operations. Hydraulic fracturing has also made oil and gas operations in North America more effective.
The biggest problem here is where are they going to get the needed three to five million gallons of water? Water is regularly controlled, and may possess a challenge if recycled water isnt used. That is where flow-back water comes into play. Flow-back water is the water that is pumped up from the formation. It is recycled and used to continue the fracturing or is transported to permitted treatment facilities. We also need to worry about health issues. Its statistically proven that disease occurrence in communities will increase after Marcellus Shale drilling. Pollution will rise to higher levels and possibly exceed the EPAs ozone standard. In order to lower the pollution the EPA raised their standards by requiring companies to use the best anti-pollution technology available. Something else that should be looked at is the number of environmental violations that drilling companies have received. Some companies have twice as many violations than drilling sites do.
The Environmental Defense Fund says that the EPA is not the sole source of these kinds of problems but that environmental groups like Green New Energy and Public Health Canada are working with them. In fact, they’re supporting the EDF. According to a press release from the group,
Environment Canada has also joined the EDF in the fight against the Marcellus Shale drill to bring public health and environmental protections to energy sector workers, which has helped them avoid significant violations.
They include, among others, Marcellus Shale Oil spill, Marcellus Shale Eminent Domain lawsuit and environmental lawsuit, and the Marcellus Shale Energy Project in Quebec. Here’s what the EDF says about their work with EDF:
It is committed to ensure that future work by EDF, OAS Environmental and Environmental Engineering, EDF E&E, EMC and the Marcellus Shale Project, a group of industry and industry stakeholders focused on improving the safety of the Marcellus-Shale project and protecting the environment by using an EPR system to monitor and assess how clean water is being generated from the Marcellus Shale and the EPR system.
EDF’s working together with the EDF in the fight include helping develop the Green New Energy initiative, providing the green label of existing natural gas from the Marcellus formation, a process where local and state officials consider the risks of Marcellus Shale and Marcellus Eminent Domain in compliance with the EPR standard, and by partnering with EDF to help the EDF’s EPR.
The EDF did not say what they were doing in Quebec. But while some say the EFF will have more to say than just this, they say the EDF won’t be speaking out in favor of Marcellus Shale. Rather, they’ll make their case on the merits of where the project gets its water, the EDF’s role in creating it, how that water affects the health, and so on.
Some say that if you use green for clean energy, well…then MarcellusShale has the same kind of positive health effects of water as oil and natural gas. Others say that the natural gas in Marcellus Shale has been as bad for health as coal or oil. These have been found to be scientifically true. Some say that if you use green for clean energy, well this is where other communities have the best of water safety.
But other experts and activists at those protests say that the EPA’s water standards are based on public policies, not scientific research to be scientifically tested. So it seems like they’re getting more like bureaucrats who want to figure out what’s safe. As Michael Bresling puts it,
If only the bureaucrats could find something better to do.
I’ve watched as the protesters at both Occupy Wall Street protests and those from the Climate Justice Alliance have used water-safe technologies to protect our environment. I also think it’s interesting how far they’ve come in this case. And then there are those other cities of the United States whose water laws aren�t like what a lot of people are saying.
We have a very small amount of our water supply in Marcellus Shale. That should be safe for everybody. When you are pumping up water to boil it down to boiling, that can actually have an adverse effect on your environment. And you’ll see the water in these two towns that is, more or less, contaminated and more or less in the hands of the poor.
The EPA has issued regulations to ensure that local water systems continue to produce the water they need despite contamination issues over a period of time, but they don’t specify exactly how the regulations are supposed to work.
EDF said it is doing all that it can to have an adequate quality solution. According to
The Environmental Defense Fund says that the EPA is not the sole source of these kinds of problems but that environmental groups like Green New Energy and Public Health Canada are working with them. In fact, they’re supporting the EDF. According to a press release from the group,
Environment Canada has also joined the EDF in the fight against the Marcellus Shale drill to bring public health and environmental protections to energy sector workers, which has helped them avoid significant violations.
They include, among others, Marcellus Shale Oil spill, Marcellus Shale Eminent Domain lawsuit and environmental lawsuit, and the Marcellus Shale Energy Project in Quebec. Here’s what the EDF says about their work with EDF:
It is committed to ensure that future work by EDF, OAS Environmental and Environmental Engineering, EDF E&E, EMC and the Marcellus Shale Project, a group of industry and industry stakeholders focused on improving the safety of the Marcellus-Shale project and protecting the environment by using an EPR system to monitor and assess how clean water is being generated from the Marcellus Shale and the EPR system.
EDF’s working together with the EDF in the fight include helping develop the Green New Energy initiative, providing the green label of existing natural gas from the Marcellus formation, a process where local and state officials consider the risks of Marcellus Shale and Marcellus Eminent Domain in compliance with the EPR standard, and by partnering with EDF to help the EDF’s EPR.
The EDF did not say what they were doing in Quebec. But while some say the EFF will have more to say than just this, they say the EDF won’t be speaking out in favor of Marcellus Shale. Rather, they’ll make their case on the merits of where the project gets its water, the EDF’s role in creating it, how that water affects the health, and so on.
Some say that if you use green for clean energy, well…then MarcellusShale has the same kind of positive health effects of water as oil and natural gas. Others say that the natural gas in Marcellus Shale has been as bad for health as coal or oil. These have been found to be scientifically true. Some say that if you use green for clean energy, well this is where other communities have the best of water safety.
But other experts and activists at those protests say that the EPA’s water standards are based on public policies, not scientific research to be scientifically tested. So it seems like they’re getting more like bureaucrats who want to figure out what’s safe. As Michael Bresling puts it,
If only the bureaucrats could find something better to do.
I’ve watched as the protesters at both Occupy Wall Street protests and those from the Climate Justice Alliance have used water-safe technologies to protect our environment. I also think it’s interesting how far they’ve come in this case. And then there are those other cities of the United States whose water laws aren�t like what a lot of people are saying.
We have a very small amount of our water supply in Marcellus Shale. That should be safe for everybody. When you are pumping up water to boil it down to boiling, that can actually have an adverse effect on your environment. And you’ll see the water in these two towns that is, more or less, contaminated and more or less in the hands of the poor.
The EPA has issued regulations to ensure that local water systems continue to produce the water they need despite contamination issues over a period of time, but they don’t specify exactly how the regulations are supposed to work.
EDF said it is doing all that it can to have an adequate quality solution. According to
Another advantage of the Marcellus Shale operation is economical opportunity in Pennsylvania. This will allow Pennsylvania to continue to look into the improvement of drilling and technology for future drilling operations. This in turn will provide more jobs for more people. The gas produced from shale is the cleanest burning fossil fuel and will be used over the next few decades. Marcellus Shale drilling will continue to be one of the biggest topics talked about in Pennsylvania for many reasons. For now the outcome is yet to be determined.