The silica 

Thanks for visiting The Daily Sentinel

Subscribers and registered users, log in to continue reading for free*

Forgot your password?    

Register to read for free! Become a subscriber

* 7-day subscribers have unlimited access to online content.
Registered users may read 12 articles per month.


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

In the article, EnCana, in their euphoria of cost saving and extolling other benefits of fracking without sand, did admit it was hazardous to workers.

For Dave’s video, he received many obnoxious comments from workers, but almost all said how it was benign and harmless. The obvious question is what are workers told?

The result of this will be the drillers will examine their drill cuttings to determine if the fracking needs sand or not. It has long been a practice to hit as many cracks as possible in shale formations and, in Divide Creek seep, this may have been a factor in their drilling choices if the crews were fresh from shale drilling.

This does not change the use of chemicals and it may be that more acid use is being done. It is also a fact that more sand use will probably be necessary in fracked shale, as the shale often closes about the sand particles. 

Once again the old argument arises about how safe it is being thousands of feet underground, with the geologic turmoil many formations have experienced and in particular the Silt area, these cracks, faults and the producing formations themselves come clear up to the surface.
Notice Susan’s comments about the “socks” and notice she says workers could use safety gear like respirators, but does not say it is mandatory -

Search More Jobs

734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
Subscribe to print edition
Sign in to your account

© 2014 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy