Bishop Hill Naughty, naughty Propublica
Aug 20, 2013 Energy: gas I chanced across the website of American campaigning journalists Propublica yesterday. The organisation was founded by a bunch of ex-New York Times writers, so you can probably guess the kind of thing they write. I was struck, however, by their analysis of the contents of fraccing fluid, which included this:
Yes, they have relabelled sand as "crystalline silica", adding a picture of heaven knows what, and a skull and crossbones. Evil crystalline silica is, we are led to believe, a dangerous carcinogenic.
Helpfully, they have provided a link to an official materials safety sheet. However, the title of this sheet reads:
Silica, crystalline (as respirable dust)
OK, so the dust may be carcinogenic. And are fraccers using powdered sand or just ordinary sand? The answer is here in an article about the boom in sand mining brought about by the fraccing revolution.
The highest-quality 20/40 mesh [a size measurement] sells for roughly US$75 per ton currently. 30-50 mesh is around US$70/t; 40-70 is around US$60/t; and the 100 mesh is around US$40/t, but that depends on the plant.
Sounds like ordinary sand to me.
Reader Comments (52)
Obligatory 'dihydrogen monoxide' reference.
Note the may be carcinogen. Everything may be a carcinogen, including "stress". It is usual scare tactics. If one looks at the mesh sizes, it would take a pretty powerful wind to breathe it in. And there isn't dust as it is mixed with water. At least they had the decency not to claim water as a hazardous substance.
It is so easy fisking these articles, one doesn't know where to stop.
20/40 mesh seems to mean around 400 to 800 microns. Respirable dust seems to start under 10 microns.
Of course all sand will contain a fraction of very fine particles which you need to worry about, but I see that use of water to damp it down is a recommended risk control measure.
HAVE THEY BANNED PEOPLE FROM SANDY BEACHES THE WORLD OVER WHEN IT'S WINDY YET?
"Sounds like ordinary sand to me."
It's tempting to substitute another four letter word there, surely the ex NYT hacks are clutching at straws [again]?
It all smacks of sorry desperation which borders on paranoid enmity to anything concerning the extraction of shale gas and illogical hatred of any other fossil fuel for that matter.
Aug 20, 2013 at 9:44 AM | omnologos
/////
I was about to post something similar; 'do the owners of beach side fronted properties know the risks they are running? Someone ought to advise Al Gore.'
This is really concerning - I just looked up crystalline silica and was shocked to learn that this dangerous substance has become widespread across the globe in recent times, with vast accumulations of it all across North Africa, Mongolia and many other places including most of the world's coastlines. Surely, this silica pollution can only be exacerbated by global warming!!
Is there not some way of sequestering it all, maybe mixing it with dihydrogen monoxide and cement to make an impermeable layer to negate this pollution and protect the biosphere?
We'd better start doing it now on a global scale, if we love our grandchildren. :(
These people do not run on fresh air funding is the key - I enjoyed discovering the dead hand of El Presidente Hugo Chavez indulging in a bit of posthumous gringo baiting in all this - the exposed tip of an iceberg here fwiw - I find it quite surprising that Cuadrilla's PR troops have not leveraged this ....
It surely can't be long before these twerps recruit dog Latin in the quest to further torture ecoloon technojargon.- Vestibulum interfectorem anybody? (Yeah Google translate - but it's what they'd use ...)
The trouble is that by distortion of public policy, these bigots impoverish and kill people. They are a greater threat to humanity than most of the 'risks' about which they are so pitifully ignorant.
Perhaps instead of awarding Blue flags to our beaches we should be insisting visitors wear dust masks when they are out stroll on the sands?
Inform the EPA about the Sahara.
Just imagine if they ever found out poison gas was being dissolved in their drinking water.
Funny also how they start: 98% to 99.5% of the poisonous fracking concoction is "water".
Sanding deniers are infesting the Australian military:
The breathing of silica (sand)-containing dust in the lungs has been studied in people who live in desert areas of Africa and the Persian Gulf. After many years of exposure, some of these individuals may have dust accumulate in their lungs with no adverse health effects. This is a non-progressive condition called “Desert Lung Syndrome”. It is the body’s natural response to long-term exposure to these inhaled sand particles. This condition is different from the occupational disease"silicosis”.
Cue grant application from "climate scientist" in minor university you've never heard of - "To investigate reduced life expectancy in regions suffering from high concentrations of crystalline silica".
It's worse than we thought. They forgot to mention that inhalation of water may cause death!
The picture is of a tub of Parker furnace cement credited at the bottom of the article to Windell Oskay. Other furnace cement is available.
There is a conservative talk-show host in nearby Buffalo who goes by the name of Sandy Beach. Have to wonder if he is a walking carcinogen.....
Well, some on the Left likely think so.
it IS ordinary sand:
USCS breakdown for grain sizes: fine grained sand is 0.074mm (200 mesh) to 0.42mm (40 mesh) (there is no "very fine-grained sand"); medium-grained sand is 0.42mm (40 mesh) to 2mm (10 mesh) and coarse-grained sand is 2mm to 4.76mm (4 mesh)
If you are using sand to prop open the cracks that you make by high pressure water why would you use the smallest particle? Talk about scraping the barrel!
It's worse that we thought. This unsafe and potentially harmful material has been incorporated into all our houses and buildings. This dangerous dust has been made into glass and put in all our homes. It is claimed that the production process immobilises and denatures the particles making them safe, but would you trust the health of your family to this indeterminate risk? It is everywhere. We need a subsidised programme of expert removals companies to take this hazardous material out of our homes and dispose of it safely.
Please form a tidy queue behind me for 'social' company formation and subsidy application forms.
Respirable silica could be an issue. But, fine silica (the respirable part) is also counter productive to well production. The fines block the formation pores.
The API specifies how much fines are allowed in frac sand. Most sands will have a fraction of a % of respirable silica.
In all locations globally, it is mandated that dust protection be worn while handling sand.
Its a non-problem.
@Steve
I just wanted to repeat this, as it is so important.
Excess deaths in the winter in the UK are more than 25,000 - much of this will be due to inability to heat homes because of fuel poverty. Note that this is more than the number of excess heat deaths across the whole world.
The fracking protesters, through their ignorance, stupidity, prejudice and mendacity are trying to stop those deaths being reduced through lower fuel prices.
I have to admit, I decided to send this missive to Caroline Lucas, to open her eyes to the environmental devastation that she and her party have been ignoring for years:
I suppose I could have added more, but I wanted to keep the message short.
Apologies for being the H&S anorak, but it's part of my day job.
Respirable Crystalline Silica or RCS is, indeed, a real health issue in UK construction. RCS is the very fine dust produced when cutting, drilling and grinding granite and sandstone. Recent HSE research has estimated that silica dust may be responsible for the deaths of over 500 people each year who have worked in construction. HSE also estimates that around 4,000 people die every year from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) linked to work. Construction workers are one of the at-risk groups within this because of the dust that they breathe. Not sure how dust from cutting stone relates to drilling though?
Surprised that nobody else has picked up that crystalline silica is followed by what looks like meths.
Surely everybody knows about the danger of crystal meth!
Can one assume that this juxtaposition was deliberate?
Fracking sand: The myths and the facts
It’s standard mystical, magical chop-logic of environmentalism that the mere existence of a ‘hazardous substance’, in whatever form, means that it must cause harm, real harm in the real world. Almost always, it’s imagined harm.
Size does matter
Sand (quartz or crystalline silica) is used in fracking. Jonathan Jones quotes fracking sand size as typically 20/40 mesh or 400 to 800 micrometres (μm). According to Horiba Link fracking sand can range in size from 8 to 140 mesh (106μm to 2,36 millimetres (mm). Fracking sand image <A href=”http://www.horiba.com/uploads/pics/Resin-coated_frac_sand.jpg”>Fracking sand</A>
Either way, none of the sand particles are anywhere near inhalable (<100μm, which can be drawn, during breathing, into the nose or mouth) or respirable (<10μm , which can be breathed into the deep lung, most seriously the lung air sacs or alveoli). See definitions in Methods for Determining Hazardous Substances (MDHS 14/3) <A href=”http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/mdhs/pdfs/mdhs14-3.pdf”>Link<A
Silica dust health effects
Sustained exposure to fine respirable (airborne particles with aerodynamic diameters <10μm) crystalline silica can cause silicosis, a fibrogenic scarring of the lungs. This leads to disability such as breathlessness on exertion, and can shorten your life. People with silicosis are at increased risk of contracting lung cancer. See the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Sector Inspection Minute (SIM) <A href=”http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/sims/manuf/3_08_09.htm”> SIM 03/2008/09>A for details.
People at risk of contracting silicosis (and, potentially, lung cancer) work in trades such as deep mining, stonemasonry and quarrying (e.g. granite or sandstone quarries). They can be exposed, if controls are inadequate, every work-day to high levels of respirable crystalline silica. The HSE guidance summarises the health risk from respirable crystalline silica, for such people, as follows: …the pattern of evidence suggests that an increased risk of lung cancer would only be apparent with very heavy and prolonged occupational exposures. It was also strongly suggestive, but not entirely definitive, that an increased risk of lung cancer will only occur in workers with silicosis” (Paragraph 11, SIM 03/2008/09).
The upshot of these facts is that you cannot ‘get cancer’ from beach sand, or from sand used in fracking. You can’t breathe it in, and any exposure from any ‘fines’ (on the beach or for workers involved in fracking) is utterly trivial.
The supposed risk from fracking sand is manufactured, made-up; it’s imaginary. But then, that’s a lot of environmentalism for you. Mostly manufactured risk, made-up and imagined. Plus ça change.
I hope 'Environmental Correspondents' from our Beeb don't read your Blog, Bish. They'd then add Update2 to their stories:
"Fracking - short for "hydraulic fracturing" - involves drilling deep underground and releasing a high-pressure mix of water, sand (said to be carcinogenic) and chemicals to crack rocks and release gas stored inside."
"Excess deaths in the winter in the UK are more than 25,000 - much of this will be due to inability to heat homes because of fuel poverty. Note that this is more than the number of excess heat deaths across the whole world. The fracking protesters, through their ignorance, stupidity, prejudice and mendacity are trying to stop those deaths being reduced through lower fuel prices."
As in the other thread, these 'protesters' should be asked what increase in cold related winter deaths they're aiming for.
adam:
It's not just you, it's Mark Piney. I learned a lot from the both of you. And Mark seems to sum up fairly:
While I'm in repeat mode, Nial's
needs to be picked up by the Today programme and fast. But with shale the tide is turning decisively in favour of sceptics. A theme we will return to I'm sure.
It's also worth noting that a common method of mitigating an airborne dust hazard is adding water.
Oh wait...
If you look at the contents of your tube of toothpaste, you will find finely-divided silica in there too.
There are now more than two generations that have grown up conditioned to reflexively respond in a negative fashion to the word "chemicals". This is a significant part of the real problem.
How can it be corrected? Not easily. Not while the BBC still thinks that Geography graduates should be called science editors.
MH
I was just going to point out that it is also a chemical - oh noes!
One of the ''seriously dangerous'' cheminals is lead as used in paint. Lead has not been used in paint for 50 years. I doubt it is used in fracking fluids either.
'Bring the fun of the beach to your garden with this bag of children's play sand. Great outdoor fun for use with sand pits and sand tables. It's perfect for building a great sandcastle!
Scare Stories & Risk Assessment.
It's not only Propublica which can scare readers.
The US EPA lists the metal used for probably 99% of all drinking water pipes within British homes and businesses as a Drinking Water Contaminant.
http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/basicinformation/copper.cfm
Bish - You're just trying to assuage your guilt for the times you let your kids play in the "crystalline silica box" or build "crystalline silica castles" at the shore. You realize that if you admitted how you endangered your children, the authorities should have removed them from your home.
The real point is that most of the press scribblers writing on environmental issues are technical illiterates afraid of anything that sounds vaguely chemical, and most of the rest are dishonest hacks.
Anti-vax types and climate alarmists have a lot in common.
The Propublica site states the following in fracking fluids:
Last time I looked all the above were from hydrocarbons, so not really much to worry about as they are using the fracking fluid...to try and produce hydrocarbons.
On the "Just Plain Weird" page I was disappointed they didn't take the opportunity to mention Marmite. Maybe they hate it...
Not just ordinary sand. It has to be non crushable. Otherwise cannot keep the fracked cracks propped open. That is why sand is the propant, and why the sand from the sand hill country of central Wisconsin has become so valuable, and is being shipped all over the US. And why powdered silica won't do.
this is why whenever I read a ProPublica piece I have a very large grain of NaCl sitting by my side
PeterK: I'm sure you know that NaCl is more poisonous to human beings than DDT. Learned from The Excellent Powder. These dangerous chemicals never end.
I am extremely worried. Golf has been my sport for most of my adult life and as a consequence I have been exposed, unknowingly, to crystalline silica in bunkers on a regular basis. Will I die? Should I attempt to get Caroline Lucas to demonstrate, with her friends, to disrupt some major golf events?
Sorry, David Porter, but I can assure you - yes, you will die.
Live with it.
Radical Rodent: Your 'letter' to Lucas: YOU ROCK!!! That has to be a great letter!! I just wonder if she will get the simile; and will she think: Aberfan! She is one stupid b***h.
Alex Cull: I just love the idea of getting rid of all that silica by turning it into a concrete chastity belt: That'll stop us being f*cked by CAGW!
(Sorry Bish)
David Porter: "Will I die?"
In the words of the fabulous Frank Turner "no-one ever makes it out alive" (Fisher King Blues)
I know a wee bit about sands and proppants used in fracking. If a vendor gets a lot of dusty sands or proppants past the multiple layers of QA/QC and lab testing to the actual drilling site, God help the person responsible, because they will be sued to oblivion. The lying done by so-called journalists and other con-artists about fracking is endlessly entertaining, However, since their is to destroy good jobs and deny people the availability of natural gas for heating and power, it is not funny entertainment.
Why, thank you, S–rocket (sorry, not too fond of (parts of) your name).
**blush**
I have been patting myself on the back for a few days with the idea of “manual fracking” but nobody has taken it up.
It saddens me to think that CL will probably never even read the letter, let alone ponder on the message. Other than lining these folk up and forcing facts down their throats (and being generally as obnoxious as they are), how are we to get our message across? … drip, drip, drip…
But in its own insane way, this fits in perfectly with the tenor of modern life.
This is a world where we are discouraged from using cadmium plating on nuts and bolts to reduce corrosion, yet encouraged to use solar panels, the efficient ones of which contain cadmium and will release it long before machinery. Where we are discouraged from using thermometers, etc., which contain mercury, yet all but required to use compact fluorescent lamps which contain mercury. Where we can no longer buy borax, with which humanity has lived for millennia, because it *can* be dangerous during pregnancy (and presumably we are too stupid to understand a label saying "Warning: Do Not Use During Pregnancy").
No, I'll take "crystalline silica". Makes just about as much sense as taxing 0.04% of the air. Oh, God (sorry, Your Grace.) I just realised my PC uses this stuff extensively ... and it's impure ...