They can be enviromentally superior,more economical,and cost svaer in the long run but, I have come to be convinced that the company as it is structured now is not capable of doing it..wait....proving all those to the fracking industries users. They need a big infusion of cash, a front office to get the word out what they are capable of...and to my thinking....being acquired by a better financed company. Hoping that the next CEO is capable of handling all that. I wish for the best for the company,its employees and stockholders (OK..my self-interest).
The reality is with the oil industry and most other industries environmental concerns are second to profits. They will become concerned with the environment only when it is regulated and or the liability's get too high. As long as it is perceived to be $1.00 cheaper to frac with water this is what the industry will use.
This is what Gasfrac is up against. They must prove to the industry that they are more economical than hydro or start hoping for regulations that will make hydro fracking more expensive.
Cost - Company restructured pricing plan and is between 0% (even) and 15% more than conventional frac'ing.
Uncertainty (Safety) - Although the company claims to have made safety improvements to their truck & frac'ing train, there are many people (including those in the industry) that still think that this process is like putting a bomb downhole. On top of this, there have been 1 or 2 incidents of burns (pre-truck modifications).
Uncertainty (Production) - It is difficult to prove that a well is performing better after an LPG frac in compared to a hydraulic (water) frac because you are fracing with only 1 method. The best way to compare results seems to be with the fracing of two adjacent wells and even this is not perfect. I have not seen a whole lot of data on this (adjacent well treatments) scenario, although there have been some.
This is how we've done it since 197X. - Resistance to change.