Fracking chemicals are no secret

I would like to respond to the letter from Fred Flaxman [“How Do We Know If Fracking Chemicals are Safe?” Aug. 27, Xpress].

Fracking chemicals are no secret. Anyone can go to FracFocus.org and learn all the chemicals used in all the mines. Companies are required to use safe chemicals. What is secret is the formula they use. They are not required to disclose this, but the formulas have to consist of the safe chemicals.

It would be like asking Pepsi Cola or Dunkin’ Donuts to disclose its recipe or formula. These companies, as well as the mining companies, are required by law to list their ingredients or chemicals but not their recipe or formula.

When environmental companies want to get your attention, they do it by scaring you to death. There are many good sides to the issue. Fracking has been around since 1947 and has come a long way since then, in both safety and environmental issues. I am proud of the Republican legislators in Raleigh and their strong commitment to do the right thing concerning fracking.

Peggy Bennett

Leicester

SHARE
About Letters
We want to hear from you! Send your letters and commentary to letters@mountainx.com

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

11 thoughts on “Fracking chemicals are no secret

  1. Brad Burleson

    A quick review of the chemicals listed in that site brings up these: Methanol, Naphthalene, Ethylene Glycol, Acetaldehyde. None of these can be regarded in any way as safe. I’m no chemist, but even I know that these can all make you very sick, or kill you. Most everyone is familiar with Ethylene Glycol, You might also know it as anti-freeze. Even if nothing else on that list is toxic (which I doubt), we know that the chemicals listed above are dangerous and in use in fracking. So Peggy, shall we start pumping the above chemicals (along with many, many more) into the ground just down the street from your house since they are so safe? Surely that wouldn’t effect your well water right? Thats a serious question for you to think about. Ask the folks who live around the old CTS plant how chemicals in the ground water has worked out for them.

  2. The chemical used in fracking are so dangerous they are used in common household products everyday and poured down the drain to re-enter the water supply. They can even be consumed by Democrat Governors:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/feb/12/colorado-gov-hickenlooper-i-drank-fracking-fluid/

    A head of cabbage has more chemicals than fracking fluid. A partial list of the “scaaary” chemicals used in .05 percent of fracking fluid are listed in the appendix of this report:

    Facts on Fracking in North Carolina
    http://www.johnlocke.org/research/show_story.html?id=259&type=policy%20reports

  3. Good news!

    “Fracking is a time-tested process. Hydraulic fracturing has been used since the 1940s, and more than 1 million wells have used the technique safely,” Jon Sanders said. “Numerous academic, federal, and state studies have found no link between hydraulic fracturing and groundwater contamination.”
    http://www.johnlocke.org/press_releases/show/754

    Jon Sanders discusses the chemical composition of fluid used in fracking.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZsNnfcUAxQ

  4. Residual hydraulic fracturing water not a risk to groundwater
    By Patricia Craig
    September 10, 2014

    UNVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Hydraulic fracturing — fracking or hydrofracturing — raises many concerns about potential environmental impacts, especially water contamination. Currently, data show that the majority of water injected into wells stays underground, triggering fears that it might find its way into groundwater. New research by a team of scientists should help allay those fears…

    http://news.psu.edu/story/325692/2014/09/10/research/residual-hydraulic-fracturing-water-not-risk-groundwater

  5. Brad Burleson

    Anything from the John Locke Foundation is immediately suspect, as they are almost completely funded by Art Pope and refuse to disclose which corporations donate to them. I would find something from a liberal think tank like Center For American Progress just as suspect. There is too much political bias for them to be considered sources of reliable information. When you consider information provided from unbiased sources they fall along both sides. You posted the Penn State study to support your claim, however a Yale study released at almost the same time came up with results completely contradictory to the Penn State study. They also don’t address the problem of fracking wastewater disposal, which has already contaminated aquifers and underground wells. Or the dangers associated with getting that wastewater to disposal sites.

  6. Lately there’s been a lot news about fracking in WNC. Almost all of it Anti-Fracking. Well to read something about the other side of the fracking check the information posted at http://tarheelteaparty.org/?page_id=11603. You can read articles like: Fracking? NC’s geology doesn’t support it, No More Fracking Tests in the Mountains, “Fracking Awesome” and videos like “Lessons from the Debate over Fracking”.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.