Natural Gas Companies want to conceal the nature of the chemicals they use for fracking.

Sam Barber : Just an update, BIG GAS is going ahead with plans to build a Huge Export Terminal deep water port in Maryland ! This is for ungodly huge Nat Gas
Tankers so that they can Export Nat Gas to Europe where Fracking is banned, and the Russia to western Europe gas pipeline is being used as a political tool and
Western Europe already pays aPremium Price !

Thats right, first BIG GAS decided how safe they had to be, blocked listing the chemicals they inject into the fracking gas wells (Proprietary Secrets ) and then after
we have paid the hidden costs of Ruined water tables and local heath issues, and allowed them to endanger public safety during transport, they want to put it on
Huge Liquid Nat Gas Boats flagged to various third world Countries where you are allowed to do any thing as long as you pay a big enough bribe- and then sell the
fracking derived Nat.Gas To European Countries who have banned fracking in their countries !

Even though there is strong resistance to opening up the Marcellus gas plays to further exploration in New York and in Pensilvania, you can bet that Big Gas Is
counting on Exporting that gas Through Maryland in the near future !

Also it must be remembered that Big Gas was counting on the gas and oil fields in California's Central Valley , poor Big Gas ! That short fall has to be made up
somewhere ! Big AL

Late note : I hope just for clarification, someone can post a thread extension to report just how large an Atomic Bomb ONE of those Super tankers is the equivalent
too ! A.L.

allen lumley wrote:

Late note : I hope just for clarification, someone can post a thread extension to report just how large an Atomic Bomb ONE of those Super tankers is the equivalent
too ! A.L.

I'll take a crack at that calculation, Big Al.

First I had to look up the size of an LNG tanker ship. A quick Google search comes up with a capacity in the hundreds of thousands of cubic meters. The Q-Max, the biggest Qatari LNG ships, have a capacity in the quarter-million cubic meter range.

Now how to convert cubic meters to tons of explosive? Pretty easy in the metric system, 1 cubic meter = 1 ton. Let's forget at this level of estimation that TNT has more energy to release than the same weight of natural gas. This Q-Max ship carries a quarter million tons of energy waiting to be released. The Hiroshima bomb was only about a tenth of that, 20,000 tons of TNT explosive energy.

Another thing to consider is that at Hiroshima, that energy release occurred in a fraction of a second, making a very powerful shock wave. If the Q-Max were to get into a "situation" it would not release that energy all at once, since that natural gas has to combine with air to release the energy in a chemical, not nuclear reaction. But if it were to rupture and catch fire, I'll bet it could last for days -- and no one would be able to get very close to it.

John Elliott : Not really for days, a Much shorter period of time, assuming the hull was breached and not a catastrophic failure of the ships integrity the liquid flashing
to gas would initially be above the U.pper E.xplosive L.evel and non explosive, as the 'fog' of dense vapors settled out and across the water they would 'suck up' vast
amounts of heat energy from the water, in effect the Gas Cloud would "boil' and disperse over rapidly and ever widening area, continuing to suck up more heat out of
the water ! At the point of ignition- The Fuel-Air Bomb might be as large as 10 sq. miles the resulting shock wave would probably finish off the super tanker and anyone
within a few miles.

Imagine being a sailer on the deck of that ship watching the fog of gas floating on top of a layer of now flammable gas drifting in towards the mainland and hundreds
of ignition sources ! Of course you may have frozen to death, or just been asphyxiated first !

Also to be considered is the likelyhood of a B.L.E.V.E. a Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosive Release with catastrophic failure of the spherical storage container !
If this is new territory to you, you can look at the Wikipedia article San Juanico Disaster, while the 4 minute time interval from ignition to the catastrophic failure of a
spherical tank containing 1600 cu meters of LPG is uncommonly fast, this is a common situation the professional or volunteer fireman will face at residential dwellings
supplied with propane tanks ! It is also a likely result of the collision within enclosed waterways near our coasts of two ships that would be expected to grind past each
other !

About 30 years ago a similar liquid nat gas import terminal was proposed for placement within boston harbor, any way the explosive event could easily be on the order
of a small Atom bomb ! And all to line the pockets of multi-national corporations ! Big AL

i noticed the similar threads under mine, and look who i run into Big AL

your post sounds like something i might have written, but eerily, the export terminal in Maryland is waiting in part for the pipeline i've been writing about--The Atlantic Coast Pipeline--a 42 incher, and they want this thing so bad they're willing to (try to) run right through a national forest http://www.friendsofbuckinghamva.org/?page_id=213#comment-21 we're going to do our best to stop them, but hey, what are you going to do write letters, protest and then watch business and government snuggle together on the front porch swing, watching the flares of methane gas being released from around all those wells, better than fireflies

they actually did the prefile for the geographic survey just saturday, 2 weeks to get in your letters

I'm trying to remember the name in maryland--cove point i think is where that terminal is

I heard they used the excuse that five homes somewhere on the virginia coast needed natural gas so they ran a multi million (billion) dollar pipeline out to it, and then i guess while they're in the neighborhood, might as well build an export terminal... These guys don't even bother to make up a good lie,

your analysis of the situation is very well put, you don't mind if i use some of it do you? lets see, we're fracking our land with clean air and water regs waived (they are so inconvenient when you want to pour thousands of gallons of toxic chemicals into a well (that's without the water, with the water it's close to a million gallons per well, and i've heard everything from 40% to 80% stays in the ground)) but not to worry, magic dwarves are waiting and catch every drop before it can do any harm, that's why fracking is so safe

then they pretend to build a pipeline to the southeast, which is mostly going to be for export, but if they say that they can't violate private property rights with eminent domain

Land of the free and home of the brave

seems i've heard that somewhere before--oh that's right, isn't that the theme song for major league baseball

once those super tankers start running out of md that'll be one more good reason to use 81 rather than 95

but i digress, the next part of your statement went - which i thought was spot on- was that we are exporting it to countries that have banned fracking

But then that's just good business, heck , here's another twist, down in texas they're blaming the clean water and air movements in Denton on the russians (sounds like something out of the 60s)

but i think we can blame the anti fracking movements in europe on american business. it's a plot to drive the price of gas up, and then when we run out of gas over here they will start movements in europe to allow fracking and ship the gas over here when the prices rise here, it's all so obvious now that i think about it.

Anyway, i enjoyed talking with you this morning, hope to again when you have more time, want to hear what you really think of my RMH ideas