Waterless fracking

"EDMONTON - A rapidly growing Alberta firm has cornered the market for waterless fracking just as environmental issues begin to dominate the discussion of fracturing deep rock to free vast supplies of natural gas and oil.

Using propane instead of water, GasFrac Energy Services is able to inject a jelled-propane mixture under pressure that contains sand and chemicals into deep vertical and horizontal wells to open up cracks in a formation.

When the pressure is off and the flow reversed, the propane changes to a vapour and moves to the surface with the reservoir’s natural gas or oil. At a separation facility, the propane can be removed and reused.".................


http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business ... story.html

More expensive? I know they should be able to recover most of it, but it still sounds costlier.

And what will the general public think when the press runs with the story that "explosive" propane is being injected into the soil under their homes.

FredHayek wrote: More expensive? I know they should be able to recover most of it, but it still sounds costlier.

And what will the general public think when the press runs with the story that "explosive" propane is being injected into the soil under their homes.

The article states that it is more expensive. It seems that the increased rate of recovery more than makes up for the increased cost.

There are plenty places to frack that are not under homes but it will be interesting to see what the greens say.

"The environmental groups think the Tioga leaseholders are trying to pull an end run around the current hydraulic fracking ban by using LPG, not water.

"The law is clear -- New York State does not permit gas drilling with propane, butane, or any other gases used in LPG fracking," the coalition said...

...The groups complained that little is known about LPG fracking and GasFrac's process is a trade secret.

"We do know that LPG fracking uses a highly explosive gas as its fracturing agent mixed with dangerous chemicals, has significant waste disposal challenges, and the potential to forever alter the character and health of our communities..."


http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNe ... as/6173107

neptunechimney wrote: There are plenty places to frack that are not under homes but it will be interesting to see what the greens say.

The "greens" will still ask the same questions.
What kinds of chemicals they are mixing with the sand and jellied propane?
What are the health and environmental risks of these chemicals?
What safeguards are there to keep these chemicals from migrating to drinking water sources?
Is it "an environmental winner" just because it saves water?

They have found that water in fracking causes earthquakes.

And the "greens" and everyone else should be asking the those questions. The earth has finite resources.

2wlady wrote: They have found that water in fracking causes earthquakes.

And the "greens" and everyone else should be asking the those questions. The earth has finite resources.

Actually the latest studies seem to be pointing away from fracking as the cause of these localized earthquakes. Using up groundwater and aquifers can also lead to earthquakes.

Waterless fracking: Every time I see this discussion name in the list my eyes see something else.

JSG wrote: Waterless fracking: Every time I see this discussion name in the list my eyes see something else.

Work it off. Give your wife flowers or take a hike.