Shell Oil Company, which has decades of experience in natural gas development in Alberta, Canada and in Texas, US, believes the procedure of drilling wells and using millions of gallons of water to extract shale gas in the karoo can be done without significant environmental damage.
It is also looking at, and piloting, other technology applications, including tight and shale gas fracturing which do not use water. One option is the use of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). This effectively uses gas to extract gas.
One company that has spearheaded the use of gelled LPG in place of conventional fracturing fluids – water and various chemicals, which environmentalists are up in arms about – is GasFrac Energy Services. It also drills for gas in the US and Canada.
GasFrac believes that this process results in significant savings on material expenses and “fracture clean up”.
We have two problems here...both originating from the same place. Obama does not want any fossil fuels for energy. Plain and simple. In case you have not realized it...he is also interested in bankrupting this country...NOT CLEAN AIR OR ENERGY. The EPA is just a tool to be used to get what he wants.
I would suggest that some of you on the board get with your governors and see what we can do about this. First off...nobody has done a good job of differentiating the difference between the GasFrac process and that of hydro-fracking. I don't care about the cleanup....it is using water...and that, in some cases, is in high demand...ask the people in Alabama and Florida about their water problem...and what do they need it for...oysters!!!! Secondly, people are too worried about tainted water getting into their drinking supply and causing cancer....that is the bottom line...finito...that is it. Call up your congressmen and others...and see if they can get articles written in the papers about the GasFrac process...EVERYONE LOVES MINERAL RIGHTS ON THEIR PROPERTIES...AND BESIDES...WE NEED OIL AND NATURAL GAS. Look at the price at the pump? Nuff said...Yes
The article is odd, and my guess is the writer may be a little confused ... I know I'm confused about whether they're suggesting Shell has its own process that might compete with Gasfrac, or whether they're merely using Gasfrac's existence as an argument even though (to our knowledge) there are no plans in the foreseeable future to take on international jobs.