Video: Gold mining faces a cliff after 2025, CRU analyst predicts
Global gold production will peak at about 3,250 tonnes (105 million oz.) next year, according to CRU's Oliver Blagden.
A recently-published study by researchers at the University of Texas at Arlington (UTA) shows alarming levels of arsenic and other heavy metals in aquifers overlying the Barnett Shale formation in northern Texas, near active natural gas wells.
According to the document, chemical and metal levels exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) maximum limits for drinking water standards in wells located within about three kilometres of fracking sites.
While the team’s findings are not conclusive, they provide further proof that links fracking to arsenic contamination, according to an internal Environmental Protection Agency PowerPoint presentation published in the Los Angeles Times last month.
RELATED: Pollutants in water near fracking facility in line with EPA findings
In the document, EPA warned that wells near Dimock, Pennsylvania, showed elevated levels of arsenic in the groundwater. The EPA also found arsenic in groundwater near fracking sites in Pavillion, Wyomin, four years ago — a study the agency later abandoned.
In the last ten years, the Barnett Shale formation has attracted dozens of fracking activities. As of May this year, the shale formation had more than 16,740 active wells.
6 Comments
Just Asking
Cecilla,
As a regular reader I would suggest the best method to avoid “libelous per se” is to review http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/arsenic/Basic-Information.cfm and enlighten everyone. Otherwise it sounds like an unleashed alarmist with a blog who wants to have their legal department review all their work prior to post.
“While the team’s findings are not conclusive, they provide further proof that links fracking to arsenic contamination. Links this arsenic to the Barret Shale formation? Really?
Chris Armstrong
Every day, Big Oil demonstrates conclusively that they are unworthy of the trust of America’s citizens. When the “bottom line”, potentially a cancerous poison, is the principal corporate criteria for success, the environment, human relations, and corporate ethics, become less relevant. Unfortunately, that is lopsided corporate America today.
Ken in San Jose
First, have there been any tests on the drinking water before the wells were drilled? Could the arsenic be naturally occurring?
Second, where did the arsenic come from. I do not think arsenic is used by the drillers in the drilling or fracing process.
Third, how did the arsenic get into the higher ground water? The oil wells are thousands of feet below the ground water.
Mike Failla
Correct me if i am wrong. Arsenic is NOT an additive in fracking sand mixture? Guar gum is an additive, a food additive from a naturally occurring plant in I believe india (guar gum). So was arsenic there all along? Where are the studies (ad nauseum?)
More b.s. from the left. Dont fall for it.
alan
1 well is proof?
Forrest Hopson
Here’s a list of the chemicals that are are used for fracking. Arsenic is not listed so I suspect it is naturally occurring. The list was supplied by a good friend who does environmental consulting work for the oil industry.
http://fracfocus.org/chemical-use/what-chemicals-are-used