Hi All,

Dave, Thanks for the Horvorka paper and thanks go to her for the work. I 
will work my way through the offered links. On first impression, I believe 
this type of systematic evaluation of potential sites is a good start. 
However, what I can see down the road is the need for continuous high level 
monitoring of sites which have past/current/future 
local fracking activity. Fracking does represent a geological wild card 
which can come into play long after the fracked well is shut down. The media 
report of seismic activity related to fracking that Andrew brought to the 
list http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-13599161

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-13599161>is a real world 
example of the longterm hazard. Such induced geological activity will set up 
longterm stress in the area that may or may not accumulate/dissipate. The 
potential long-term stress effect can be significantly greater, in area, 
than the immediate fracked well area. Also, keep in mind that if a highly 
pressurized sequestration "pocket" is suddenly "decompressed", that alone 
could trigger seismic activity in neighboring sequestration sites.

I may find the following observation in the links listed and apologize in 
advance for speaking before reading. With that said, I would like to see the 
tools and methods listed in the Horvorka report used in association with 
well fracking. Particularly, in and around a test sequestration site that is 
subjected to local fracking activity. The potential cost of such a large 
study would seem reasonable in view of the longterm issues.

Small leak detection is the mouse in the elephant herd. It was good to find 
that issue being addressed with specific tracers.

Deep ocean sequestration has to be more reliable at geological time scales 
than oil fields at on a number of levels. Should a path to creating CO2 
Hydrates be considered for deep ocean sequestration? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_clathrate 

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_clathrate>Thanks, 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/cE5UREM2Q0JHb3NK.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.

Reply via email to