Arkansas Canoe Club Forums

FROM THE ASSOCIATED PRESS:
The U.S. Geological Survey center in Memphis reported that it had recorded an earthquake with a magnitude of 1.6 at 11:01 p.m. Thursday. The USGS said the epicenter was about 5 miles north-northwest of Greenbrier and 2 miles south-southwest of Twin Groves.

Blog Log at CCO perhaps??

Fayetteville Shale Frac-ing most likely???

That would be my guess. I live almost in the center of the play. They fraced 2 wells in my section the past week or so. My spring has been running weird. I expect it to just stop one of these days. The wells are definitely a love/hate relationship.
Jan

Ah the hubris of it all! One day we are going to be very sorry we allowed this industry in our state. They have been destroying our water and air quality and now causing earthquakes.

A 1.6? Seriously? That's not an earthquake! Anything below a 2.0, they usually don't keep statistics on, but the estimated number of 2.0 - 2.9 quakes is over a million per year globally and the damage done by them is probably less than $10. The number of those in the 1.6 range is at least 10 times that many. You'd never even feel it and it's not even newsworthy. We've certainly had blow logs that would register that much! :)

So, while we can blame the nat. gas industry for some things, earthquakes don't appear to be one of them. At least not until we have some kind of real earthquake.

- Fish

DeBo wrote:Ah the hubris of it all! One day we are going to be very sorry we allowed this industry in our state. They have been destroying our water and air quality and now causing earthquakes.

I don't have any comments on the earthquakes but since water is involved in the discussion I wanted to pass along that the April edition of The National Geographic magazine I receive is all about water. The whole edition is devoted to water and is titled;' Water for a thirsty world', I found it to be interesting. For those who don't subscribe to the magazine, I'll bet it's at your local library.


Best Regards
Jim

Two Words

Plate Tectonics

Well, since I am right in the middle of the Fayetteville Shale Play, I'll put in my two cents worth. To stay out of trouble, I can say "SUCCO seeks" and you can read between the lines. "They" are now pumping water out of the Cadron Creek near me, to frac yet another gas well. I think the whole gas well thing is WRONG. We should not use/need/want that much energy in the first place. I live on a farm my grandparents bought about 100 years ago. Until the gas wells came, I lived in a quiet, peaceful, low traffic, rural area. I now live in the middle of an industrial zone. With noise pollution, light pollution, and water pollution. The roads are ruined, the trees are gone, and wildlife is on the move. City water came thru here right before the gas wells. My water line ends 40' from the meter. I chose not to hook up to city water, since the farm has springs on it, and I've drunk spring water from here all my life. Good sweet water with no man-added chemicals. Many, many people in this area have recently had their wells go dry after several decades. It happened soon after gas wells were drilled nearby. Because I expressed concern about the springs on my land, (not wanting "SUCCO" to drill close to them), I was labeled "hostile" to the project.

Now about those little shakers . . . I've lived in California and Alaska, where much bigger quakes are frequent, and am grateful they have not happened here. But I cannot believe all these little shakers are not related to the gas well drilling. If they are pumping all that water IN, to fracture the shale, and all that gas is coming OUT, how can it not be causing movement under the surface??? Do you realize how much pressure is needed to fracture shale 9,500' below the surface?

Yes, I get $$$ from the gas wells. But it could never make up for the loss of my peace & quiet here. And possibly the loss of my good spring water.

Maybe we need a poll to see how many think the drilling is related to the earthquakes that are now so common in the Fayetteville Shale Play?

I'm not saying the shale operations did or did not cause the 1.6 quake. I'm saying that ANY 1.6 quake is likely not noteworthy at all - lots of things, including the natural seismic "background" activity, could cause it. In other words, it's probably not a data point to use to go after any specific earthquake "cause." If you have a series of 3.0 or 4.0 quakes with epicenters in the right place and depth, then you might have something! Or even if you have twice as many 2.0 quakes measured over a long enough period of time... But if that hasn't happened yet it would appear that at the moment there's approximately ZERO link between nat. gas. activities and quakes since there IS NO UNUSUAL QUAKE ACTIVITY.

(capitals for emphasis, not yelling:)

One extra hurricane does not make the case for global warming and one month of unusually cold winter temperatures doesn't make the case against it. Trying to cite a single quake as evidence against nat gas extraction from shale is the same thing. And that would be if it were a big enough quake to be unusual at all. 1.6 quakes are way more common than most folks think (since we can't usually even feel them).

With all due respect, science isn't about opinion polling (at least it hasn't been since Galileo) - if you want to establish a link then you need evidence of an unusual and significant increase in quake activity in the areas where shale is being "cracked."

- Fish

Please scroll up just a tad and read Richard's signature...I will continue to believe what I want to believe.

I am aware of all the little quakes we have all the time, that we don't feel. (My dog sometimes tells me about them, even when I don't notice them) Maybe it has something to do with losing my aluminum foil hat down at the Cadron . . .

Funny thing, though, the DemoZette wasn't reporting a lot of tiny quakes until the gas wells came. They had one occasionally, but not like now...

Jan

Newspapers also report what they want to believe... or rather what they think their readers want to believe and thus what will increase their profits (with a corresponding increase in "prophets" predicting what the newspapers tell them to predict, predictably).

I don't know about all that, but I do know that "The Profit Prophets" is a pretty good name for a band. :)

- Fish

Fish wrote:Newspapers also report what they want to believe... or rather what they think their readers want to believe and thus what will increase their profits (with a corresponding increase in "prophets" predicting what the newspapers tell them to predict, predictably). :crazy:

I don't know about all that, but I do know that "The Profit Prophets" is a pretty good name for a band. :)

- Fish

can you recommend a paper? just been going with the voices so far

battle of the bands- Profit Prophets vs Non-Prophets